S. Kalaiselvi v. The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.10.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR in Crl.O.P.No.27316 of 2024 S.Kalaiselvi ... Petitioner/defacto complainant Vs.
1. The Inspector of Police, J8 Neelangarai Police Station, Chennai.
2. S.Revathi
3. Velmurugan ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the accused in Crl.O.P.No.27316 of 2024 and direct the respondent police to take appropriate action against the 1st and 2nd respondents in accordance with law.
For Petitioner :
Mr.A.M.Packianathan Easter For R1 :
Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For R2 & R3 : M/s. Selvi George 1/5
O R D E R
This petition has been filed by the defacto complainant for cancellation of bail granted to the 2nd & 3rd respondents for the reason that they have obtained anticipatory bail by suppressing the proceedings pending before the Special Tribunal constituted under Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
2. It is also submitted that the Writ proceedings initiated against the petitioner was also suppressed even in the mediation proceedings. He further submitted that, petitioner herein was abused and threatened and she was not allowed to stay in the house.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner/defactro complainant further submitted that, since there is suppression of fact regarding legal proceedings initiated between the parties and suppression is valid ground to cancel the bail granted to the respondents 2 and 3 herein, prays to cancel the anticipatory bail.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reported that, in this 2/5
case investigation completed and final report filed and cognizance was also taken.
5. I have considered the submission and perused the material on record.
6. The petitioner were alleged to have committed the offence under Sections 294(b), 323 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of Prevention of Women Harassment Act. The allegation levelled therein is that, defacto complainant and her husband were mistreated by the petitioners herein by taking advantage of their vulnerable old age. Further, they had physically attacked the defacto complainant and her husband and also caused severe injuries and they had also criminally threatened her.
7. This Court after considering the merits of the case registered against the respondents 1 & 2 has granted anticipatory bail to the respondents 2 & 3 in Crl.O.P.No.27316 of 2024 on 29.10.2024. Though, it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner/defato complainant that there is suppression of facts regarding the proceedings initiated by the parties and the 3/5
consequent harassment made by the respondent Nos. 2 & 3, I am of the view that the FIR registered deals with the allegation of attack on the defacto complainant and criminal intimidation and this Court had taken note of the allegation and granted bail and further, in this case, final report also filed and therefore, this Court is not inclined to cancel the anticipatory bail.
8. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous petition is dismissed. 16.10.2025 sma K.RAJASEKAR, J.
sma 4/5
in Crl.O.P.No.27316 of 2025 16.10.2025 5/5