CRL OP/8826/2026 of A Sree GuhanRaj Vs The State Rep. by

CRL OP No. 8826 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 8826 of 2026 A Sree GuhanRaj ..Petitioner Vs The State Rep. by Inspector of Police K6 TP Chatiram Police Station, Kilpauk, Chennai. Crime No.39 of 2026 ..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 482 of BNSS to enl arge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in the Crime No.39/2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, K6 TP Chatiram Police Station, Kilpauk. For Petitioner: Mr.K. Arunagiri For Respondent: Mr.P.Dhileepan Govt.Advocate (Crl Side) ORDER The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 315(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 4 of Women Harassment Act in Crime No.39 of 2026 on the file of the respondent pol ice seeks anticipatory bail. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 8826 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 5 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner harassed and smit ten the de facto complainant. Hence, this complaint. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petiti oner was innocent and that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and he is ready to co-operate for investigat ion. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the petitioner and the de facto complainant were in a relationship and when they accidentally met in a park, wordy quarrel erupted between them and in furtherance, the petitioner slapped upon the de fact complainant. The re was no injury sustained by the de facto complainant. However, he opposed to gr ant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking int o consideration of the totality of the circumstances and upon the fact that FIR was https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 8826 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 5 registered on 26.01.2026, this Court is of the view that at this length of time, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail subject to certain conditions. 7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) da ys from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate at Egmore, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate conce rned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled; (b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity; (c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 8826 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 5 thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; (e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 08-04-2026 SHL To: 1. The V Metropolitan Magistrate at Egmore 2. Inspector of Police K6 TP Chatiram Police Station, Kilpauk, Chennai. 3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 8826 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 5 C.KUMARAPPAN J. SHL CRL OP No. 8826 of 2026 08-04-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis