Selva Ganesh v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Selva Ganesh

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Tirupparangundran Police Station Madurai.

(Crime No. 375 of 2025 )

...Respondent

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Mahendran Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For Intervenor : Mr.R.Maheswaran PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 375 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

1/6

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), 318(4), 351(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No. 375 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant have love affair and the petitioner has make a false promise to marry her and had sexual intercourse. Believing the said promise, the defacto complainant has given Rs.7,90,000/- to the petitioner and however, the petitioner neither returned the money nor married the defacto complainant. As per the instruction of the petitioner, on 29.06.2025, when the defacto complainant came to Madurai, the petitioner along with two persons abused her in filthy language and threatened with dire consequences. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit 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 2/6

offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prayed to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the intervenor would submit that by giving false promise, the petitioner cheated the defacto complainant. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, a case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 318(4), 351(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No. 375 of 2025. He further submits that the petitioner has no previous case. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

7. Considering the rival submissions made on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and the relationship 3/6

between the parties and considering the facts that the alleged occurrence took place on 29.06.2025 and however, FIR has been registered on 19.07.2025 and the material part of investigation might have been completed and no previous case is pending against the petitioner, 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 anticipatory bail on condition to 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 Judicial Magistrate-VI, Madurai, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders; [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 4/6

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) 10.04.2026 apd (2/2) To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-VI, Madurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Tirupparangundran Police Station Madurai.

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

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J apd

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 12700 of 2025 Date : 10.04.2026 (2/2) 6/6