Selvaraj v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 13/08/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI 1.Selvaraj, S/o.Thangam 2.Chinnathambi, S/o.Thangam 3.Veeranan, S/o.Thangam 4.Shivaranjani, W/o.Sankar 5.Radhika, W/o.Chinnathambi 6.Thangam, S/o.Nalliappan ... Petitioners/A1, A3 to A7 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by, the Inspector of Police, Melavalavu Police Station, Madurai District.

(Crime No.90 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant 1/7

For Petitioners : Mr.M.Jegadeesh Pandian, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.S.Prakash, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.90 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A1, A3 to A7, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 49, 127(2), 296(b), 133, 324(4), 115(2) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023 r/w. Section 4 of TNPHW Act in Crime No.90 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the 1st accused and the de-facto complainant are husband and wife. After their marriage, the 1st accused obtained the jewels of the de-facto complainant and used them for his business. Thereafter, a dispute arose between them on account of the alleged illegal relationship of the 1st accused with the 2nd accused, which led to the filing of a divorce petition by the 1st accused, but the same was dismissed. Subsequently, on 18.06.2025, the 1st accused 2/7

trespassed into the de-facto complainant's house, abused her in filthy language, and assaulted her with his hands. Hence, the present case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the 1st petitioner is the husband of the de-facto complainant, and 2nd to 6th petitioners are the in-laws of her. the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not involved in any offences as stated by the prosecution. They have been falsely implicated in this case. He, however, submitted that the petitioners are willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail for the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) submitted that there are totally seven accused persons in this case and the petitioners have been arrayed as A1, A3 to A7. A3 to A7 are the in-laws of the de-facto complainant. The petitioners tortured the de-facto complainant. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, the specific overt act against the 1st petitioner/1st accused, this 3/7

Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the 1st petitioner/1st accused at this stage. However, considering the limited overt act against the 2nd to 6th petitioners/A3 to A7, and that they are only in-laws of the de-facto complainant, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the 2nd to 6th petitioners/A3 to A7, subject to certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the 2nd to 6th 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, Melur, Madurai on condition that the 2nd to 6th 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

(a) the 2nd to 6th petitioners 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; 4/7

(b) the 2nd to 6th petitioners shall furnish their residential address and mobile number to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai. In the event of any change in their residential address, the 2nd to 6th petitioners shall report the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai; (c) the 2nd to 6th petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

(d) the 2nd to 6th petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(e) the 2nd to 6th petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(f) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the 2nd to 6th petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the 2nd to 6th petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court themselves as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5/7

5560] and;

(g) if the accused/the 2nd to 6th petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as against the 1st petitioner and is allowed as against the 2nd to 6th petitioners. sd/- 13/08/2025 / TRUE COPY / /09/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

mkn TO 1 The Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai.

2 The Inspector of Police, Melavalavu Police Station, Madurai District.

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

6/7

+1 CC to M/s.M.JEGADEESH PANDIAN, Advocate ( SR-8884[I] dated 18/08/2025 )

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.11525 of 2025 Date :13/08/2025 NM/03.09.2025/ 7P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 7/7