Chinnaiya vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2637 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2637 Mad
Judgement Date : 20 May, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Chinnaiya vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of ... on 20 May, 2026

Author: R.Vijayakumar

Bench: R.Vijayakumar

                                                                               CRL OP(MD). No.9508 of 2026


                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                   ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

                                                     Date : 20/05/2026

                                                         PRESENT

                                   The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

                                               CRL OP(MD). No.9508 of 2026


                     1.Chinnaiya

                     2.Seetharaman

                     3.Chitra                                         ... Petitioners/Accused 1 to 3


                                                             Vs


                     The State of Tamil Nadu represented through
                     The Inspector of Police,
                     Keelavalavu Police Station,
                     Madurai.
                     (Crime No.100 of 2026)                   ... Respondent/Complainant


                                  For Petitioners : Mr.A.Abdulkabur

                                  For Respondent : Mr.A.Albert James,
                                                   Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

                           PETITION FOR ANTICIBATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS



                     1/6




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                              CRL OP(MD). No.9508 of 2026


                     PRAYER :-

                                  For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.100/2026 on the file of the

                     respondent Police.

                     ORDER :

The Court made the following order :-

The petitioners / accused Nos.1 to 3, who apprehend arrest at the

hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under

Sections 329(4), 77, 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) BNS and Section

4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman (Amendment)

Act, 2002, in Crime No.100 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police,

seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 16.04.2026 at about 05.00

p.m., while the defacto complainant was taking bath, the first petitioner

allegedly attempted to misbehave with her. On hearing the alarm raised

by the defacto complainant, the first petitioner immediately fled from the

spot. Thereafter, when the family members of the defacto complainant

went to the house of the first petitioner and questioned about the same,

the petitioners attacked them, abused them in filthy language and also

threatened them with dire consequences. Hence, the case.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

3. When the matter is taken up today, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdraw

this petition as far as the first petitioner is concerned and he has also

made an endorsement to that effect. Hence, this petition is dismissed as

withdrawn as against the first petitioner concerned.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit

that the petitioners 2 and 3 are innocent and they have not committed any

offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail

to the petitioners 2 and 3.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing

for the respondent police would submit that the offences committed by

the petitioners are serious in nature.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the

nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioners 2 and 3, this

Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 2 and 3

subject to certain conditions.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

7. Accordingly, the petitioners 2 and 3 are ordered to be released

on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, on condition that the

petitioners 2 and 3 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, Melur, within a period of

fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on further

conditions that:

[a]the petitioners 2 and 3 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 2 and 3 shall report before the respondent police once in a month i.e., on the first day of every English calendar month at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c]the petitioners 2 and 3 shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[d]the petitioners 2 and 3 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 petitioners 2 and 3 in accordance with law as if the conditions have been

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

imposed and the petitioners 2 and 3 are 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];