← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/14657/2026granted

Gokulnath v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

2026-06-11Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11.06.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN Gokulnath ..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Sankari Police Station, Salem District.

Crime No. 98 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Prayer: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023 to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest pending investigation in Crime No.98 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.C.S.Saravanan For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 3(5), 127(2), 308(5) and 118(1) of BNS, 2023, (34, 342, 386 & 324 IPC) and subsequently @ 118(1), 127(2), 140(3), 3(5) and 308(5) of BNS (324, 342, 365, 34 & 386 of IPC) in Crime No.98 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner along with other accused extorted a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from the de facto complainant, who is a migrant worker. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that based on the false promise that the petitioner would get a job for the de facto complainant, who is a migrant worker, has extorted money from the de facto complainant. He further submitted that the petitioner's earlier anticipatory bail was dismissed by this Court in Crl.OP No.7453 of 2026 on 24.03.2026. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the nature of allegations, the fact that the investigation in this case is pending, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the

petitioner is not required. Hence, 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 No.I, Sankari, 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 learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioner(s) 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(s) 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(s) in accordance with law as if the

conditions have been imposed and the petitioner(s) 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(s) thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

11.06.2026 gbi To

1. The Inspector of Police, Sankari Police Station, Salem District.

2.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Sankari.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

gbi 11.06.2026