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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR 1.K.Maheshwari 2.M.Amutha 3.C.Karunakaran ... Petitioners/A1 to A3 Vs State Represented by The Inspector of Police, R2 Kodambakkam Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.600 of 2021) ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.600 of 2021 pending on the file of the respondent police.

For petitioners : Mr.P.Kalaikumar For Respondent : Mr.V.Meganathan Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/6

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.600 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that there was a family dispute between the petitioners and the de-facto complainant with regard to property. The petitioners illtreated and assaulted the de-facto complainant. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that a counter complaint has been registered in Crime No.599 of 2021 against the de-facto complainant. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent 2/6

condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed for anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioners and de-facto complainant are relatives. There was a family dispute between them with regard to property. He further submitted that a counter complaint has been registered in Crime No.599 of 2021 against the de-facto complainant. Now both of them compromised and both F.I.R. to be closed.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made on either side and it is a case in counter, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

3/6

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 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned XVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each, with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] if the petitioners fail to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;

[b] The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the Application for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify 4/6

proofs to ensure their identity;

[c] the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the defacto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by the respondent as and when required; [e] the petitioners to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for Police custody beyond the first fifteen days, they shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard; [f] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[g] 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 petitioners 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];

5/6

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

rsi [h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

30.06.2025 rsi To:

1.The Inspector of Police, R2 Kodambakkam Police Station, Chennai.

2.The XVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court Madras.

6/6