Bharathkumar v. State Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Bharathkumar S/o.Dayanithi, No.15/33, Krishnamurthi Salai, Erukancherry, Kodungaiyur, Chennai-600 118.

2. Jayanthi W/o.Vinoth, No.41/42, Govindasamy Nagar V O C Street, Korukkupet, Washermenpet PO, Chennai - 600 021.

3. Ruthamma W/o.Ravanaiah, No.280, J J Nagar, Korukkupet, Washermenpet, Chennai - 600 021.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, P5 MKB Nagar Police Station, Chennai District.

Crime No.70 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event on their arrest by the Respondent Police in Crime No.70 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner(s):

M/s.N.Arunkumar For Respondent(s):

M/s.R.S.Indira, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS, in Crime No.70 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the defacto complainant and A2 are husband and wife, and due to matrimonial disputes between them, the petitioners abused and assaulted the defacto complainant, thereby causing injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that they are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that there were no injuries sustained by anyone and that the petitioners have no previous cases against them. Hence, he opposed to grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

6. Considering the totality of the circumstances and taking into account that the entire issue appears to have arisen out of matrimonial discord and that no injuries were caused to anyone, this Court is of the firm view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail, subject to certain 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 (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 petitioners 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 slip (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 first petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am for a period of two weeks and second and third petitioners, being ladies, shall report before the respondent police 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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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 petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

08-06-2026 DRL

To 1.The Metropolitan Magistrate No.X, Egmore, Chennai.

2.The Inspector of Police, P5 MKB Nagar Police Station, Chennai District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 08-06-2026