Surendra Praveen, v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps-Thiruvadanai

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10.12.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Surendra Praveen ... Petitioner/Accused Vs 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep By The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thiruvadanai, Ramanathapuram District.

(Crime No.5 of 2025) 2.Iswarya ... Respondents (Respondent No.2 impleaded as per order dated 18.09.2025 in Crl.M.P. (MD).No.12641 of 2025) For Petitioner : Mr.D.Gershon Gnanapaul, Advocate.

For R-1 : Mr.S.S.Manoj, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For Intervener : Ms.S.Mahalakshmi, Advocate 1/6

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.5 of 2025 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 Police for the offences under Sections 85, 316(2) and 82(1) BNS in Crime No.5 of 2025, on the file of the first respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant were loved each other and married. After that, the defacto complainant and the petitioner were living at Thiruppur. Out of their wedlock, a male child was born. Due to the defacto complainant's illness, he returned to her native place. At that time, the petitioner went to job at Kalaiyarkovil and he was having a friendship with one Vinitha and her parents were threatened to the petitioner. Therefore, he went to Tiruppur and working as labour. But, he has not sent money to the defacto complainant and he was lived with some other women. Hence, a case was registered.

2/6

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He, however, submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the first respondent Police and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent / intervener opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the fact that this is a second anticipatory bail application and also considering the fact there is no change in circumstances and in order to protect the other minor child, the respondent Police is directed to arrest the petitioner. 3/6

6. Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 10.12.2025 KSA Note : Issue Order Copy by 20.01.2025 4/6

To

1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thiruvadanai Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

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

5/6

S.SRIMATHY, J.

KSA

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.21990 of 2025 Date : 10.12.2025 6/6