Santhosh 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

1. Santhosh

2. Samson @ Boobalan

3. Muthulakshmi ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police H-6 RK Nagar Police Station Chennai District.

(Cr.No. 25 of 2026) No. 5/43, 4th street,Jeeva nagar, Korrukupet,Washermenpet, Chennai- 600 021.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of the arrest by the respondent police H-6 RK Nagar police station, Chennai District for an alleged offence U/s. 126(2), 296(b),115(2),118(1),351(2) BNS Act in Crime No. 25 of 2026 in the interest of justice and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Karthick V For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Balaji Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioners who apprehend arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2),

118(1), and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 in Crime No. 25 of 2026, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 21.01.2026 around 08.00 p.m., the petitioners waylaid the de facto complainant, abused him using filthy language, threatened him, and physically attacked him. Hence the case. 3.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons, residents of Chennai city, and have been completely falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that this is the first anticipatory bail petition moved before this Court, no similar petition is pending before any other court, and no previous criminal case is pending against the petitioners. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed anticipatory bail for the petitioners.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that no previous case is pending against the petitioners. He further submitted that the injured has already been discharged from the hospital. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the Petitioners.

5.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6.Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the nature of offences, the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, and also the fact that no previous case is pending against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions.

7.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned XV Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town at Chennai on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday at 10.00 a.m for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[b] the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; [c] the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of

the Court;

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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];

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNSS, 2023 14-05-2026 SHA Note:

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To:

1.The XV Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town at Chennai.

2.The The Inspector of Police H-6 RK Nagar Police Station Chennai District..

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.

P.DHANABAL, J.

SHA 14-05-2026