CRL OP/9849/2026 of Mageshwaran Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police.

CRL OP No. 9849 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 9849 of 2026 1. Mageshwaran 2. Shanmuga Priya ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep by the Inspector of Police, Brahmapuram Police Station, Vellore District. Crime No.53/2026 ..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the petitione r on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.53 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Arun Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Dhileepan Govt.Advocate (Crl Side) ORDER The petitioners, apprehending arrest by the respondent police for offences punishable under Sections 296(b) and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, read with Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of H arassment of Woman Act, 1998 (as amended), in Crime No.53 of 2026, seek anticipa tory bail. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9849 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 6 2. According to the prosecution, the petitioners allegedly attacked the de facto complainant, who is the wife of the 1 st petitioner and abused her in filthy language at her parental home. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the 1st petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant and the 2 nd petitioner is his sister and it is a matrimonial dispute. The 1 st petitioner and the defacto complainant are living separately; and the defacto complainant left the matrimonial home, leaving their two children in the sole care and maintenance of the 1 st petitioner. The petitioners visited the parental house of the defact o complainant in a bona fide attempt at reunion and reconciliation. He would further contended that they have been falsely implicated due to the m atrimonial rift. Furthermore, they submit that custodial interrogation is not required. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), appearing for the respondent police, opposes the grant of anticipatory bail, on instructions, submitted that while it is a matrimonial dispute, the altercation during the reunion attempt escalated into physical violence, resulting in the de facto complainant being hospitalised for four days.  He further submitted that the petitioner has no bad antecedents. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9849 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 6 5. Considering the totality of the circumstances, particularly that the matter arises from a matrimonial dispute and the 2 nd petitioner is a woman with no prior antecedents, and the injured person has been discharged from the hospital, this Court takes note of the submission that the custody of the minor children remains with the 1 st petitioner. While the prosecution alleges overt acts resulting in hospitalisation, given the nature of the dispute and the fact that custodial interrogation is not deemed necessary for the progress of the investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to certain conditions. 6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fiftee n (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Katpadi, Vellore District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each, with two sureties each for a likesum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioner(s) 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; https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9849 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 6 (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(s) shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; (d) The petitioner(s) shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (e) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner(s) in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner(s) 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]; https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9849 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 6 (f) If the petitioner(s) thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 20-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No Jeni To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Katpadi, Vellore District, 2.The Inspector of Police, Brahmapuram Police Station, Vellore District. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9849 of 2026 __________ Page6 of 6 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. Jeni CRL OP No. 9849 of 2026 20-04-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis