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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. Chandran 2.Selvi Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Udumalapet Police Station, Tiruppur.

Crime No. 760 of 2025 Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest them in connection with Crime No.760 of 2025 pending on the file of respondent For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Siva Kumar For Respondent(s):

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 296(b), 115(2), 351(2) of

BNS, 2023 r/w Section 4 of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.760 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the first petitioner had an extra-marital relationship with the defacto complainant, established a separate matrimonial home and they lived together, resulting in her pregnancy and the birth of a female child. Subsequently, the petitioners visited the defacto complainant's house, kicked her abdomen and caused injuries. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and not involved in the alleged offence. He further submitted that a false complaint has been foisted against the petitioners and they are ready to produce sufficient sureties and to abide with conditions imposed by this Court, therefore, he prays for grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the first petitioner had an extramarital relationship with the defacto complainant, resulting in her pregnancy and a female child was born to her, due to which, the petitioners allegedly attacked her, kicking her abdomen and causing injuries. Hence, she vehemently opposed for grant of

anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5.Considering the violent attack made by the first petitioner on the defacto complainant, who had just delivered a child, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the 1st petitioner. However, the allegations levelled against the second petitioner are relatively minor in nature. Hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the 2nd petitioner subject with certain conditions:

6. Accordingly, the 2nd petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Udumalapet, on condition that the 2nd 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further conditions that:

[a] the 2nd petitioner and 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 2nd petitioner 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 2nd petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d] the 2nd petitioner 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 2nd petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the 2nd 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].

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

7.

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition in respect of 1st petitioner is dismissed and in respect of 2nd petitioner is ordered. 15-12-2025 gbi

To 1.The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Udumalapet Police Station, Tiruppur District. Crime No. 760 of 2025 2.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Udumalapet.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

gbi CRL OP No. 34305 of 15-12-2025