Anandhu Vijay v. State Rep. By Its, Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.10.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR and Crl.M.P.No.18620 of 2025 Anandhu Vijay ... Petitioner Vs.
State Rep.by its, Inspector of Police, W-2, All Women Police Station-Pallavaram, Shankar Nagar, Pallavaram, Chennai - 600 044.
... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.32 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police.
For Petitioner : Mr.Govardhanan. V For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.J.Chandran Sundar Sashikumar for Mr.P.Arumugam 1/7
O R D E R
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 69 and 77 of BNSS, 2023, in Crime No.32 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The allegation is that the petitioner was the friend of the defacto complainant and subsequently, they were lived together from the year 2023 onwards and taking advantage of their relationship, the petitioner promised to marry the defacto complainant and had sexual relationship with her. Thereafter, when she asked to arrange the marriage, the petitioner has demanded 100 sovereigns of gold and car. The defacto complainant also attempted suicide on 18.05.2025 by consuming rat poison. Thereafter, the petitioner started to avoid her and subsequently threatened her stating that he is having some intimate photographs of the victim and he will upload the photographs in the social media. Hence, the case. 2/7
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the defacto complainant were lived together for a long period and had physical relationship. The victim is aged about 28 years, it is only a consensual relationship and not a case of cheating and he was not demanded any money. He further submitted that he has not uploaded any of the photographs in the social media. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the intervenor/defacto complainant submitted that the petitioner is able to get some of the photographs from the petitioner, without her knowledge and further submitted that the petitioner has made promise to marry her and had sexual relationship and subsequently, demanded money for the marriage.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police reported that the case has been recently registered and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
3/7
6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
7. The FIR reveals that from the year 2023 onwards, the petitioner and the defacto complainant were in love with each other and they have also lived together for some period and thereafter the petitioner refused to marry her and subsequent threat made by the petitioner herein. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
8. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:
(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;
4/7
[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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity;
[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;
[d] the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and if the investigation reveals that any photographs available it shall be handed over to the Police for the purpose of the investigation;
[e] the petitioner shall also cooperate for the medical examination, if any required;
[f] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];
5/7
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
9. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed.
07.10.2025 dna To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram.
2. The Inspector of Police, W-2, All Women Police Station-Pallavaram, Shankar Nagar, Pallavaram, Chennai - 600 044.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
6/7
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
dna 07.10.2025 7/7