Malaravan v. The State Rep By, Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27-05-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
1. Malaravan S/o.Sakthivel, Amman Kovil Street, Alampadi, Thittakudi, Taluk, Cuddalore District.
2. Mugilan S/o.Rengaswamy, Amman Kovil Street, Alampadi, Thittakudi, Taluk, Cuddalore District.
3. Saravanan S/o.Selvaraj, Amman Kovil Street, Alampadi, Thittakudi, Taluk, Cuddalore District.
4. Arivu @ Arivazhagan S/o.Selvarasu, Amman Kovil Street, Alampadi, Thittakudi, Taluk, Cuddalore District.
5. Subash S/o.Sivakumar, Amman Kovil Street, Alampadi, Thittakudi, Taluk, Cuddalore District.
..Petitioners/Accused 1,5,6,7,8 Vs The State rep by, Inspector of Police,
Ramanatham Police Station, Cuddalore.
Crime No.135/2026 ..Respondent/ complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest pending investigation in Crime No.135 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Ramanatham Police Station, Ramanatham, Cuddalore District .
For Petitioners:
Mr..P.Thirumalaivasan For Respondent(s):
Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar, Government Advocate (criminal side)
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Sanhita (BNS), 2023 read with Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman (Amendment)Act, 2002, in Crime No. 135 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that due to a dispute between two groups with regard to erecting temple flex boards and banners by the defacto complainant in connection with the conduct of Ayyanar Temple Festival at lambabdi Village, which was objected by the petitioners. As a result, a wordy quarrel arose between two groups and, during the occurrence, the accused persons allegedly abused and assaulted the defacto complainant and also threatened her with dire consequences. Hence the complainant. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioners, pleading innocence on the part of the petitioners and false implication in the case, seeks indulgence of this Court.
He submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to previous enmity and misunderstanding between the two groups in connection with the temple festival. He would further submit that the occurrence arose out of a sudden wordy quarrel and no such offecne as alleged by the prosecution had taken place and the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Therefore he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. Per contra, the case of the prosecution as put forth by the learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for grant of anticipatory bail, is that the petitioners actively participated in the occurrence, abused and assaulted the defacto complainant and threatened her with dire consequences and that the investigation is still
pending.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record and considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegations, this Court is of the view that the occurrence appears to have arisen out of a dispute between two groups in connection with the temple festival and that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary at this stage. Further the petitioners have undertaken to co-operate with the investigation and therefore, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
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 Judicial Magistrate-II, Tittagudi, Cuddalore, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.
[a] the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the concerned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;
[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
[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 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];
[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.,2023.
27.05.2025 jrs/rpp Note:
1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order on the Official Website of this Court.
2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded on 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.
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
JRS To:
1. The Judicial Magistrate-II, Tittagudi, Cuddalore.
2. The Inspector of Police, Ramanatham Police Station, Cuddalore.
Crime No.135/2026
3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.
27-05-2026