CRL OP No. 17255 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 17255 of 2026 1. Durga D/o. Deenadayalan, No.140, Thiyagarayapuram 3rd Street, Thangal, Tiruvottiyur,Chennai-600 019. 2. Mala W/o. Deenadayalan, No.140, Thiyagarayapuram 3rd Street, Thangal, Tiruvottiyur,Chennai-600 019. 3. Magesh S/o Deenadayalan No.140, Thiyagarayapuram 3rd Street,Thangal, Tiruvottiyur, Chennai-600 019. ..Petitioners Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Inspector of Police, N-1, Royapuram Police Station, Chennai. ..Respondent PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 BNSS praying to enlarge the petitioners on the bail in the event of their arrest in Crime NO.192 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.M. Gokulakrishnan For Respondent(s): Mrs.R.S.Indira Government Advocate (Crl.Side) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17255 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 6 ORDER The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 329(4), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1) of BNS in Crime No.192 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 18.06.2026, the petitioners and other accused persons trespassed into the complainant’s home and assaulted him. Hence the complaint. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the first petitioner is wife of the defacto complainant. The second and third petitioners are mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the defacto complainant respectively. Due to family differences, a false case has been foisted against the petitioners and that they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. 4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that due to family dispute, when the wife of the defacto complainant/first petitioner along with other accused went to defacto complainant’s residence, altercation took place. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17255 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 6 5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions. 6. Considering the nature of the allegations and the fact that the first and second petitioners are women and the first petitioner being wife of the defacto complainant, second and third petitioners being in-laws of the defacto complainant and that the entire dispute pertains to family matters, this Court is of the firm view that, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions. 7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town at Chennai on condition that each of the petitioners 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 concerned, and on further conditions: (a)If the petitioners fail 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. 17255 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 6 (b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety slip (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 third petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required; the first and second petitioners shall report before the respondent police as and when required. (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner are 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 petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 06-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No MFA https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17255 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 6 To 1. The XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai. 2. The Inspector of Police, N-1, Royapuram Police Station, Chennai. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17255 of 2026 __________ Page6 of 6 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. MFA CRL OP No. 17255 of 2026 06-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis