Sathish Kumar v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 14-05-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL and Crl MP No.8581 of 2026 Sathish Kumar S/o.Madasamy ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police S-7, Madipakkam Police Station, Chennai - 600 117 (Crime No.148 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, seeking to enlarge the Petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent in respect of Crime No.148 of 2026 on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Ragavendran Advocate For Respondent(s):

Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervener:

No representation

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2) of the BNS, 2023, in Crime No.148 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that, the defacto complainant had sold their property to the petitioner in the year 2022 and thereafter, the petitioner had leased out the property to the defacto complainant and refused to pay the lease amount to the defacto complainant. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He submitted that the defacto complainant is the one who has to pay twenty lakhs to the petitioner. He further submitted that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. He also submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there was a property dispute between the parties. He further submits that the petitioner has no previous case against the petitioner. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. There is no representation for the intervener. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offences, and also considering the fact that there are no previous cases pending against the petitioner and the fact that the property dispute is involved in this case and also considering the fact that the petitioner is none other than the owner of the property, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Alandur, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or the Police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further conditions that:

[a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court.

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]; [g] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S. 2023.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

14-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order ssa

To

1. The Inspector of Police, S-7, Madipakkam Police Station, Chennai - 600 117 (Crime No.148 of 2026)

2. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Alandur.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

P.DHANABAL, J.

ssa 14-05-2026