Prasanna Balaji Bathala v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Prasanna Balaji Bathala ..Petitioner Vs The State Rep. by, The Inspector of Police, D3, Kanakammachathram Police Station, Tiruvallur District.

..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. Not Known of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner:

Mr.M.Neshapriyan For Respondent:

Ms.R.S.Indira Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 126(2), 351(3) r/w 74, 75(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.not known of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are working at Poonimangadu Government Primary Health Care. On 12.05.2026, while the defacto complainant entered the Primary Health Care, the petitioner touched and harassed her sexually. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a Government Servant who is working as a Clerk at Government Primary Health care. The defacto complainant being a superior officer to the petitioner used to abuse the petitioner at his workplace several times in front of all his co-workers. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated only due to the previous work related enmity between the petitioner and the defacto complainant. It is also submitted that the petitioner has been suspended from service and departmental enquiry is also underway. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner harassed the defacto complainant sexually. He would further submit that the offences are serious in nature. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides that the petitioner has already been suspended from service and furthermore, that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for investigation, this Court is

inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to 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 (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tiruttani, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate

actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

02-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order NSL To

1. The Inspector of Police, D3, Kanakammachathram Police Station, Tiruvallur District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3. The Judicial Magistrate, Tiruttani.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 02-06-2026