Selvakumar S K v. State Rep By Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04-12-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
1. Selvakumar S K
2. Bindu
3. Vadivel
4. Dinesh
5. Magesh Balaji Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep by Inspector of Police Pallikaranai Police Station, Tambaram, Chennai Crime No.589 of 2025.
Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest pending investigation in Connection with the Crime. No.589 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.Rajan R
For Respondent:
Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate Crl.side
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 127(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 318(4) and 324(4), 351(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 4 of Women Harassment Act, in Crime No.589 of 2025, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the 1st petitioner married the defacto complainant's sister, concealing his existing marriage with the 2nd petitioner. Subsequently, the petitioners had a verbal altercation with the defacto complainant, Sarath Chandra Babu, to prevent exposure of the marriage. They then entered his house, abused and assaulted him using filthy language, and damaged the household articles. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the
petitioners have no previous cases pending against them and investigation in this case is pending. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the fact that the petitioners have no previous cases against them and though the investigation is pending, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the learned Mahila Judge, Alandur, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) each, 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 further condition that: (a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;
(b) the petitioners 1, 3, 4, 5 shall report before the respondent police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two
weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; and as far as the 2nd petitioner is concerned that she shall report before the respondent police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;
(c) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(d) the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(e) 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 petitioners 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]; and;
(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
04-12-2025 gbi Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes
To 1.State Rep by Inspector of Police Pallikaranai Police station, Tambaram, Chennai 2.The Mahila Judge, Alandur.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR J.
gbi CRL OP No. 33281 of 04-12-2025