CRL OP(MD). No. 13335 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 13335 of 2026 1.Gunasekaran 2.Cellakannu @ Sellakannu 3.Chinnathai 4.Vairamani ...Petitioners/Accused Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Usilampatti Madurai. (Crime No. 14 of 2026 ) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : Mr.C.Ragupathi Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 13335 of 2026 PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 14 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 316(2), 296(b), 115(2), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 4 of TNPWH Act in Crime No. 14 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant and the petitioners 2, 3 and 4 are the father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the defacto complainant, respectively. Though the marriage took place as early as in the year 2011, they have been consistently demanded additional dowry from the defacto complainant's parents and thereafter, the first petitioner and the defacto complainant purchased a property and subsequently, the first petitioner/husband has mortgaged the property and paid the entire money to one Chinnathai @ Selvi, who has been arrayed as A5 in this 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 13335 of 2026 case. It is further stated that the first petitioner also sold the car, which was purchased by the defacto complainant. Even thereafter, the first petitioner, due to the illicit intimacy with A5, continuously threatened her and used to attack her brutally and also criminally intimidated her. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the family members of the first petitioner are added as accused and the allegations levelled against the petitioners in the FIR are false and they are ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4. The learned Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the allegations levelled against the first petitioner is serious in nature and he has harassed the defacto complainant and threatened her in several occasions. The petitioners have no previous case. He further submitted that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 13335 of 2026 5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side and on perusal of the entire records including the averments made by the defacto complainant in FIR that the first petitioner is having illicit intimacy with the fifth respondent harassed the defacto complainant on various occasions and the has threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences, hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the first petitioner. Insofar as the petitioners 2 to 4 are concerned, since there is no serious allegation as against the petitioners 2 to 4, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 2 to 4, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioners 2 to 4 are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate – I, Usilampatti, on condition that the petitioners 2 to 4 shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 13335 of 2026 Twenty Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners 2 to 4 shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of three weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation. [c] the petitioners 2 to 4 shall cooperate with the investigation. [d] the petitioners 2 to 4 shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [e] the petitioners 2 to 4 shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [f] the petitioners 2 to 4 shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [g] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners 2 to 4 in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 2 to 4 released on bail by the learned 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 13335 of 2026 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]. [h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S. 06.07.2026 LS To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-I, Usilampatti. 2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Usilampatti, Madurai. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 13335 of 2026 K.RAJASEKAR, J LS ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 13335 of 2026 Date : 06.07.2026 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis