Dharma .T v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Keela Paralachi

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 04.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 10092 of 2026 T.Dharma ... Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Keela Paralachi Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

(Crime No.37 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Karthick Kumar Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 37 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 126, 74, 351(2) of BNS and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 4 of TNPHW 1/6

Act, in Crime No.37 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that when the defacto complainant walking near the Church the petitioner, who is the ex-lover of her, intercepted her and threatened her to have a relationship with him, threatened her on knife point, as if he will upload the photographs taken by them jointly in the facebook, and attempted to misbehaved with her and also threatened with criminal intimidation. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner is the ex-lover of the defacto complainant. Without informing him she had married another man. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the offences are grave in nature. The petitioner is the boy friend of the defacto complainant. He threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences. 2/6

The petitioner has no previous case against him. He vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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 petitioner, there is previous dispute between the parties, considering that the petitioner has no previous case, and considering all other facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] 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, Aruppukottai, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police at 10.30 a.m., on every Saturday for a period of four weeks, 3/6

thereafter as and when required for interrogation: [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

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

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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)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 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukottai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Keela Paralachi Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

4/6

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

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 10092 of 2026 Date : 04.06.2026 6/6