← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/15378/2026granted

Santhanam v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

2026-06-18Honourable Mr.Justice C.Kumarappan5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 18-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Santhanam

2. Amutha ..Petitioners Vs.

State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Kedar Police Station, Villupuram, in Crime No.103/2026 ..Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners in the event of their arrest in Crime No.103 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police.

For Petitioners:

Mr.N.Mahendra Babu For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 118(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.103 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant and the petitioners were known to each other and that there existed certain disputes

relating to "Nooru Naal Velai Thittam" and that on account of such dispute, the petitioners allegedly interfered with the complainant and issued threats.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant 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 and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and would submit that injured has been discharged from the hospital. 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.From the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this Court is of the view that, due to a wordy quarrel, the petitioners assaulted the defacto complainant. Taking into consideration that the injured person was discharged from the hospital on the date of the occurrence and further that the

first petitioner is about 70 years old and the second petitioner is a woman, this Court finds that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required at this length of time. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, 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 Judicial Magistrate No.II, Villupuram, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond each 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 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week 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 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.

18-06-2026 NSL To

1. The Inspector of Police, Kedar Police Station, Villupuram.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Villupuram.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 18-06-2026