Ravi v. The State Rep.By, the Inspector of Police,

ORDER The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 191 (2), 296 (b), 131 and 351 (2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 r/w Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Cr.No.140 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. Page2 of 4

¶2The case of the prosecution is that there was a quarrel between the petitioner and the defacto complainant and it is alleged that the petitioner abused, intimidated the defacto-complainant with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) would submit that the petitioner abused the defacto complainant in filthy languare and intimidated her with dire consequences. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. Page3 of 4

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the Additional Mahila Court, Villupuram District, on condition that the petitioner 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 Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity. [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at

10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks; thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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]. Page4 of 4

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC. 17-07-2026 ep To

1.The Additional Mahila Court, Villupuram District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kandamangalam Police Station, Villupuram District.

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN Ravi ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Kandamangalam Police Station, Villupuram District. Cr.No.140 of 2026. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in connection with the Cr.No.140 of 2026, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner(s): Mr.Muruganandham K For Respondent(s): Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Criminal side)