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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Dharmaraj Kongampatti, Ilayangudi Taluk, Sivaganga District ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Puthur Police Station, Cuddalore District.

Crime No.52 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.52 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner(s):

G Pugazhenthi For Respondent(s):

R.S.Indira Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 146 of BNS Act, 2023 and Sections 16, 17, 18 of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition)Act, 1976 and Section 14D of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 in Crime No. 52 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 16.06.2026, the officials of the Labour Department, Revenue Department and Police Department conducted joint inspection near Maniyam Adur Village, Kattumannarkoil Taluk, Cuddalore District, based on credible information regarding the engagement of bonded labourers and child labourers. During the inspection, it was found that the petitioner had employed one boy aged about 17 years engaged in goat-grazing work. Further, the petitioner has advanced Rs.2,50,000/- as an advance for service of the 4 children and on that pretext, the petitioner has unlawfully exhorted work from the children. Hence, a case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the Petitioner.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that petitioner had been engaged in unlawful bonded and child labour. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the Petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, though there is allegation against this petitioner of bonded and child labour, considering the fact that the victim has been rescued, at this length of time, this Court is of the firm view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. 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, Kattumannarkoil, Cuddalore District, 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 10.30am., 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 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.

29-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order nr To:

1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kattumannarkoil, Cuddalore District,

2. The Inspector of Police Puthur Police Station, Cuddalore.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NR 29-06-2026