Nallasamy v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Koombur
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 08.12.2025 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD)No.21243 of 2025
1. Nallasamy
2. Mohana ... Petitioners Vs.
State of TamilNadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Koombur Police Station, Dindugal District.
(Crime No.156 of 2025) ... Respondent For Petitioners : Mr.B.Azhagesh For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervener : Mr.S.Muniyandi PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.156 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
1/6
ORDER: The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(B), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) BNS, 2023 r/w Section 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.156 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the 1st petitioner is the son of defacto complainant through his 1st wife and on 20-11-2025 at about 06:30 am the de-facto complainant had asked the 3rd accused about the blocking of water pipe connection. The 1st petitioner interrupted and attacked the de-facto complainant using unparliamentary words and when the wife of de-facto complainant tried to prevent, she was grabbed by the 2nd petitioner and the 1st petitioner has slashed the right forearm with sickle and left the place by criminally intimidated the de-facto complainant and his wife. Hence, a case has been registered as against the petitioners.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence. He seeks this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the 2/6
petitioners. Further, the petitioners are the son and daughter in law of the defacto complainant.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the offences committed by the petitioners are serious in nature.
5.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners have forcefully removed the defecto complainant from the place of living. When this Court enquired about the same by calling the defacto complainant, it is revealed that the defacto is complainant is having two sons, ie., one through the first wife and through the second wife. The first wife's son is the petitioner. The second wife's son was having a wavered life and he completely spent the amount and sold some of the properties and he is not having any property as of now. Therefore, in order to grab the property which was allotted to the first wife's son / 1st petitioner, the defacto complainant has given a false complaint. In fact, the 1st petitioner has given an undertaking that he would locate a proper house for the defacto complainant wherein they can live peacefully until their lifetime and he will provide complete physical and financial assistance to them. 3/6
6.Accepting the said undertaking, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 7.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, 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, Vedasandur, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready and on further conditions that: [a]the 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 Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity. [b]the petitioners shall take a house for lease wherein the defecto complainant shall live until the lifetime. The petitioners shall also grant monetary support to the defacto complainant.
[c]the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required. [d]the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[e]the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. 4/6
[f]On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 is 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 of BNS.
08.12.2025 TMG TO
1. Judicial Magistrate, Vedasandur.
2.The Inspector of Police, Koombur Police Station, Dindugal District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
S.SRIMATHY,J TMG
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.21243 of 2025 Date : 08.12.2025 6/6