Senthamilselvan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Sub Inspector Of Police, Kadayanallur

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

1. Senthamilselvan

2. Seeniraj

3. K. Samy

4. Karuppasamy

5. Kannan

6. Kowshik Raj

7. Babu @ Murugaraj

8. Selvin @ Selvam

9. Prasath

10. Tamilarasan

11. Velusamy

12. Murugaraj @ Babu

13. Kannamal @ Kannatha

14. Manimaran

15. Madathiyammal

16. Shanmugathai ... Petitioners Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep By, The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kadayanallur Town Police Station, Thanjavur District.

Cr.No. 35 of 2026 ... Respondents 1/4

PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 35 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police.

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Rajeshkumar For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.M. Dinesh Hari Sudarsan

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 329(1), 296(b), 326(e), 303(2) and 49 of BNS Act, 2023 its corresponding offence under IPC Sections 147, 148, 441, 294(b), 434, 379 and 109 of IPC, in Crime No.35 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners have trespassed into the lands of the defacto complainant and used filthy language against him and further destroyed all the fencing and iron gates and tool, articles all with them. A case has been registered as against the petitioners.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent police strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

2/4

4. The contention of the petitioners is that they are using the pathway and are claiming an easementary right over the same. Further, the petitioners claim that they belong to the SC/ST community and therefore have a right. The further contention is that there was an order to initiate acquisition proceedings, however, none of those proceedings culminated in conferring any right upon the petitioners. Hence, this Court is of the considered opinion that even if easementary right it is conferred on the petitioners, the same would not grant any right upon the petitioners to damage the defacto complainant's property or to threaten the de facto complainant. It appears that the entire village has become aggressive. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 10.02.2026 KSA 3/4

TO

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kadayanallur Town Police Station, Thanjavur District.

2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/4