Kaleeswari vs The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police
2026 Latest Caselaw 2575 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2575 Mad
Judgement Date : 14 May, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Kaleeswari vs The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police on 14 May, 2026

                                                                               CRL OP No. 12404 of 2026


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                       DATED: 14-05-2026
                                                           CORAM
                                       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL
                                                  CRL OP No. 12404 of 2026

                 Kaleeswari,
                 S/o.Karuppasamy,
                 No.76/2, Anna Colony,
                 Melachinnayapuram,
                 Thammanayakkanpatti,
                 T.Sedapatti, Virudhunagar - 626 204.

                                                              Vs


                 The State Rep By,
                 The Inspector of Police
                 Padalam Police Station,
                 Chengalpattu District.
                 (Crime No. 138 of 2026).
                                                                                    ..Respondent(s)

                PRAYER:-The Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of
                B.N.S.S, to enlarge the petitioner on Anticipatory Bail in the event of his arrest
                pending investigation in Crime No. 138 of 2026 on the file of the respondent.


                                  For Petitioner(s):        Mr.Vignesh Masilamani

                                  For Respondent(s):        Mr.S.Balaji
                                                            Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

                                                           ORDER

The petitioner / Accused, who apprehends arrest in the hands of the

respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(3), 296(b),

__________ Page1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

115(2), 118(1), 140(3), 310(2), 351(3), 61(2)(a), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 in

connection with the Cr. No.138 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had purchased a car

by obtaining a loan from the State Bank of India. Due to the non-payment of

dues, the Bank employees seized the car from the petitioner. The petitioner

along with others obstructed the bank employees and caused damages to their

vehicle and took back the car. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that only the co-

accused had took the car from the Bank Employees. The petitioner is innocent

and he has been falsely implicated in the present case by the respondent and

hence the petitioner may be released on anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the

respondent police would submit that the petitioner along with others obstructed

the Bank employees and took back the car seized by them from the petitioner

and the petitioner has also caused damages to the Bank employees vehicle. He

would further submit that the car has been recovered from the petitioner and the

co-accused has been released on bail and hence, he strongly opposed to grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

__________ Page2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

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

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side, considering the nature

of offences, considering the fact that the dispute between the parties is with

regard to the re-payment of loan and the car has been recovered from the

petitioner and the co-accused has also been released on bail, this Court is

inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following

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 days from the

date on which the order copy made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate-II,

Maduranthakam on condition that the petitioner shall 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 Magistrate concerned and on further

condition that:

[a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at

10.00 a.m. for 30 days and thereafter as and when required;

[b] the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement,

threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to

dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

[c] the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of

__________ Page3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

the Court;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] 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 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].

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under

Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

14-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

rst

Note:

1.Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the official website of this Court

2.All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in official website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

__________ Page4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

To:-