Jegadeswaran v. State By Its

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Jagadeswaran S/o.Muniyappan, Residing at NO.459, Kulathumettu street, Aradapattu Village and post, Thiruvannamalai District.

2. Usha W/o.Muniyappan, Residing at NO.459, Kulathumettu street, Aradapattu Village and post, Thiruvannamalai District.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State by its Inspector of Police, Veraiyur Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

Cr.No.70 of 2026.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Cr.No.70 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s):

M/S. SURESH SANKAR For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections

75(2), 296(b) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.70 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the first petitioner, who was employed in the shop belonging to the husband of the defacto complainant, was wrongfully confined, assaulted and humiliated by uttering his caste name by the husband of the defacto complainant and others. Based on the complaint lodged by the petitioners, a case has been registered.

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. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that it is a case and case in counter. He further submitted that the injured was discharged from the hospital. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

6. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that there is a case and case in counter, that no one sustained any injury, and that the injured was discharged from the hospital. In

such circumstances, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail with 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.I, Thiruvannamalai, 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 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, daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks 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 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 petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

24-06-2026 DRL To

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thiruvannamalai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Veraiyur Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 24-06-2026