Balaji v. The State Rep. By Inspector Of Police Station
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18-06-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Balaji ..Petitioner Vs The State Rep. by Inspector of Police Station AWPS-Vandalur, Police Station, Chennai District.
..Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on Anticipatory Bail in the event of his arrest or surrender in Crime in Crime No.39/2025, pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner:
Mr.R.Madhubala For Respondent:
Ms.R.S.Indira Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 85, 79 and 351(2) of BNS in Crime No.39 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner induced the defacto complainant, who is a divorcee to marry by falsely representing that he was also
a divorcee. It is further alleged that after the marriage, the de-facto complainant was subjected to harassment, demands for a new house, pressure to undergo miscarriage and criminal intimidation. Hence the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had already been enlarged on bail by order dated 15.12.2025 in Crl.O.P.No.34319 of 2025. However, due to difficulty in arranging sureties within the stipulated time, the said bail order lapsed and consequently stood dismissed. Therefore, the petitioner has been constrained to file the present petition. The learned counsel would further submit that while granting the earlier order, this Court had considered the merits of the case and enlarged the petitioner on bail. It is also submitted that there are no specific allegations against the present petitioner in the FIR.
4. The said factual position is not seriously disputed by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent.
5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.
6. This Court is of the view that a perusal of the earlier order dated 15.12.2025 in Crl.O.P.No.34319 of 2025 shows that the petitioner was enlarged
on bail after considering the merits of the matter. The bail order came to lapse only on account of delay in producing sureties. Taking into consideration the earlier order, the absence of specific allegations, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions. At this juncture, the learned counsel would submit that the petitioner is willing to contribute a sum of Rs.25,000/- to any welfare scheme as may be directed by this Court.
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, Tambaram, 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 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/accused is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) as nonrefundable deposit in favour of the Dean, Rajiv Gandhi Government General Hospital, Chennai;
(d) 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; (e) 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];
(f) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.
18-06-2026 NSL
To
1. The Inspector of Police, AWPS-Vandalur, Police Station, Chennai District.
2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.
3. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tambaram.
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
NSL 18-06-2026