R. Ramanathan v. The State Rep By Its Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN R. Ramanathan S/o. Late Ranganathan, No. 7/11, Mariyasusai Nagar, Vannarapalayam, Cuddalore-607001.

..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep by its Inspector of Police Kurinjipadi Police Station, Cuddalore District.

Crime No.142 /2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in respect of Crime No.142/2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kurinjipadi Police Station, Cuddalore District. For Petitioner(s):

Mr. I. Periaswamy For Respondent(s):

MR.N.PALANIVEL, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 329(4), 296(b), 131, 74 & 351(3) of BNS Act, 2023 in Crime No.142 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the defacto complainant, who is working as Sub Inspector of Survey in the District Revenue Office had previous enmity with the petitioner. Due to such animosity, the petitioner along with other persons, allegedly went to the house of the defacto complainant, abused his wife and son in filthy language and also threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, while the defacto complainant was working as head surveyor at Panruti Taluk, he had received money from the petitioner for transfer of patta in respect of the petitioner's land. Since, the defacto complainant failed to do so, the petitioner questioned the same, due to such reasons, the defacto complainant has lodged a false complaint against him. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that the occurrence took place on 04.06.2026 and that no one had sustained any injury. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions.

6. Considering the nature of the allegations, the fact that no one sustained any injury, and the age of the petitioner is about 62 years, this Court is of the firm view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, 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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kurinjipadi, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a 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 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 shall report before the respondent

police daily at 10.30 am for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required;

(d) 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];

(e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

24-06-2026 DRL To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kurinjipadi.

2.The Inspector of Police Kurinjipadi Police Station, Cuddalore District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 24-06-2026