Sankaranarayanan v. The State Rep. By, Sub Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 31.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR 1.Sankaranarayanan 2.Moorthy @ Appu 3.Narayanan .. Petitioners Vs.

The State Rep by, The Sub-Inspector of Police, Chidambaram Town Police Station, Cuddalore District.

(Crime No.192 of 2025) .. Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent police in the case pending investigation in Crime No.192 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.R.Thamaraiselvan For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Page No.1 of 6

ORDER

The petitioners were apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 85, 108, 62 of BNS Act, 2023 in Crime No.192 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that A1, who runs a gold covering shop, is having an affair with A2. A1 is married to the de facto complainant's daughter. A3 and A4 are employees of A1. When the de facto complainant's daughter, who is the wife of A1, questioned him about his affair with A2, a wordy quarrel arose, and she was assaulted. Thereafter, A3 and A4 also threatened her, due to which she attempted to commit suicide by consuming caustic soda from the shop. Subsequently, she was taken to the hospital and has now been discharged. Hence, the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent, have not committed any offence, as alleged by the prosecution and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory Page No.2 of 6

bail to the petitioners.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent Police while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners reiterated the prosecution case.

5. Having 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, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

6. 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 Judicial Magistrate-II, Chidambaram, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) 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, and on proof of payment Page No.3 of 6

of deposits, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

[a] if the petitioners fails 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 proofs to ensure their identity;

[c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for further interrogation;

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

[e] the petitioners shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police office as and when required; [f] 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, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard; [g] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

Page No.4 of 6

[h] 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 petitioner 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];

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

31.07.2025 cda To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-II, Chidambaram.

2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Chidambaram Town Police Station, Cuddalore District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.

Page No.5 of 6

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

cda 31.07.2025 Page No.6 of 6