Inthira v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thiruvonam

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 04/06/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. Inthira

2. Balasindhu

3. Balakrishnan ... Petitioners/Accused No.3,4&5 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Thiruvonam Police Station, Thanjavur District.

Crime No.102 of 2026. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.102 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police.

For Petitioners : A.Mohamed Arif-Ms/5094/2019, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 221, 296(b), 132, 351(2) of BNS r/w Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman (Amendment) Act, 2002, in Crime No.102 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 23.04.2026, during the course of polling at the Panchayat Union Primary School polling booth situated at Pathupulividuthi Village, Thiruvonam Taluk, Thanjavur District, One selvesh created a disturbance in the polling process by insisting that he should be appointed as a booth agent. When the police personnel attempted to prevent and control the situation, he, along with certain local villagers, obstructed the police personnel from discharging their duty. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that the petitioner's name was not found in the FIR and no 2/6

previous cases is pending against the petitioners. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that during the polling, there was a dispute between the parties and the accused persons prevented the police personnels from discharging their duty and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. He would further submit that the second petitioner has no previous case and the petitioners 1 & 3 have 1 previous case each.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners, and there is a dispute between the parties with regard to election and the petitioner is not a named accused in the FIR and the second petitioner has no previous case and though the petitioners 1 & 3 have 1 previous case each, in that case, they were released on bail, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the 3/6

petitioners, subject to the following conditions: [a] 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, Orathanadu, Thanjavur District, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of 4 weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.

[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. 4/6

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

(P D B J) 04.06.2026 dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Orathanadu, Thanjavur District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruvonam Police Station, Thanjavur District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL,J dss

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9850 of 2026 Date : 04/06/2026 6/6