CRL OP(MD). No.15552 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 28/07/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No.15552 of 2026 1. Ashwini, 2. Balasubramaniyan, 3. Nallarasan @ Nallarasu, 4. Bhagavathsingh @ Bagavath ... Petitioners/A1, A2, A3 & A5 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Pattukottai All Women Police Station, Thanjavur District. Crime No.10 of 2026. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.K.Neethimohan, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-38AB. For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.10 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.15552 of 2026 ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A1, A2, A3 and A5, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 318, 82(1), 82(2) and 83 of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.10 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the first petitioner is the daughter-in-law of the defacto complainant. After the marriage of the first petitioner with the son of the defacto complainant, the second petitioner colluded and instigated the first petitioner to desert the defacto complainant. It is further alleged that the petitioners continuously demanded money from the defacto complainant on various reasons and also threatened her. A separate complaint in this regard was lodged against the petitioners, pursuant to which they appeared before the respondent Police and gave an undertaking that they would not harass the defacto complainant. However, even thereafter, they continuously harassed her, demanded money and collected gold jewels and a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from her. Subsequently, the defacto complainant came to 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.15552 of 2026 know that the first petitioner had married the fourth petitioner herein. Hence, the present complaint has been lodged. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that a false acquisition has been levelled against the petitioners, who are the close relatives of the defacto complainant. 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) appearing for the respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the FIR has been registered only recently and the investigation in this case is still pending. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6.Considering the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioners and also the fact that the petitioners are close relatives of the defacto complainant, this Court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary. Hence, I am inclined to 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.15552 of 2026 grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions; [a] Accordingly, the petitioners 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, Pattukottai, on condition that the petitioners 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 Judicial Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners 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 interrogation. [c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.15552 of 2026 [e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S. (K R S J) 28.07.2026 vsg 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.15552 of 2026 TO 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Pattukottai All Women Police Station, Thanjavur District. 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.15552 of 2026 K. RAJASEKAR,J., vsg ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.15552 of 2026 Date : 28/07/2026 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis