K.Baskaran v. The State of Tamilnadu Rep by the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 189(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2) and 324(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [Sections 143, 294(b), 323, 326, 506 and 425 of IPC, 1860] in Crime No.155 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, and seek anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners abused the de facto complainant in filthy language, assaulted him with a knife and an iron rod, caused injuries, and criminally intimidated him. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that due to a property dispute this occurrence had taken place and the injured person got discharged on 17.06.2026. The petitioners are innocent and have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution, and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned counsel for the intervener submitted that the petitioners have three previous cases in FIR No.160 of 2025, and FIR Nos.54, 57 and 155 of 2026. He further submitted that the petitioners are habitual offenders and now and then they used to behave like this. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶5The said contention was reiterated by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police.

¶6From the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) as well as the learned counsel for the intervener, it is amply clear that the petitioners have misused the liberty granted by this Court by subverting justice by committing offences now and then. As rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), the petitioners do not deserve anticipatory bail. In view of the fact that there are three previous cases against the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioners 1 to 3. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed insofar as the first, second and third petitioners are concerned.

¶7Insofar as the fourth and fifth petitioners are concerned, considering the fact that they are women and on humanitarian grounds, this Court is of the firm view that, at this length of time, further custodial interrogation of the fourth and fifth petitioners is not required. Therefore, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the fourth and fifth petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

¶8Accordingly, the fourth and fifth petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory 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 made ready, before the learned District cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Kalasapakkam, Tiruvannamalai District, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 fourth and fifth petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned 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;

(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 identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The fourth and fifth petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the fourth and fifth petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the fourth and fifth petitioners 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 fourth and fifth petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

¶9In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed insofar as the fourth and fifth petitioners are concerned and dismissed insofar as the first, second and third petitioners are concerned.

23.07.2026 cda

C.KUMARAPPAN, J. cda To

1.The District cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Kalasapakka, Tiruvannamalai District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kalasapakkam Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

23.07.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 23.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1.K.Baskaran 2.M.Rajesh 3.B.Ajith 4.B.Kalpana 5.B.Sowndhariya ... Petitioners Vs. The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Kalasapakkam Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District. (Crime No.155 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.155 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.S.B.Viswanathan For Respondent : Mrs.R.S.Indira, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)