Crl.O.P.No.34914 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 02.01.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.34914 of 2025 1. Chidambaram 2. Rathina ... Petitioners Vs. State By, Represented by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Hosur, Krishnagiri District. Crime No.124 of 2025. ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.124 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.N. Manokaran For Respondent : M/s.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For Intervenor : Mr.M.Kalaiyarasan https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.34914 of 2025 O R D E R The petitioners herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 318(4) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.124 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail. 2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the marriage between the defacto complainant and the 1st petitioner was taken place during April – 2019 and they were having a child and thereafter petitioner forced her to become the partner of the business activities and thereby forced her to sell the land for a sale consideration of Rs.30 lakhs and therafter pledged 40 sovereigns of gold jewels in the bank and obtained loan for a sum of Rs.10 lakhs. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that though there was a misunderstanding erupted between the parties in the year March 2025 and subsequently, the legal notices were exchanged and further matrimonial proceedings were initiated and the custody of the child was also https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.34914 of 2025 put to challenge by the 1st petitioner herein and civil suits were also initiated for claiming right over some of the properties. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners stating that, by forging the signature of the victim, petitioner had swindled various profits of the victim. He further submitted that, if the petitioners are released on bail, he may hamper the investigation. 5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the jewels were not recovered yet. 6. It is seen that, from the month of March 2025, there was a dispute between the parties and there are matrimonial proceedings were initiated and the custody of the child was also put to challenge by the petitioner herein and civil suits were also initiated for claiming right over some of the properties and since custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions: https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.34914 of 2025 7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Hosur on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition that: [a] if the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled; [b] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30.a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.34914 of 2025 [d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283]; [e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 02.01.2026 sma To 1.Judicial Magistrate No.I, Hosur. 2.Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Hosur, Krishnagiri District. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.34914 of 2025 K.RAJASEKAR, J. sma Crl.O.P.No.34914 of 2025 02.01.2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis