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

ORDER The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 103(1), 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.222 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

¶2The prosecution case is that there was prior enmity between the Page1 of 4 deceased and the accused persons in connection with a civil dispute. On

03.05.2026, at about 7 pm, the deceased went to meet A1 and A2 regarding the said dispute. During the interaction, a wordy altercation arose, and A1 and A2 allegedly assaulted the deceased, who later succumbed to the injuries sustained the occurrence. The present petitioners are A3 and A4, the parents of A1 and A2. Hence, the case.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court and they are willing to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the case of the prosecution and vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. She submitted that the occurrence resulted in the death of the deceased and that the allegations disclose a brutal act of murder. she further submitted that the petitioners are specifically named in the FIR and that the investigation is still pending. Hence, she prayed for dismissal of the anticipatory bail petition.

¶5This Court has considered the submissions made on either side. Page2 of 4

¶6The occurrence took place on 03.05.2026. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that no specific overt act is attributed to these petitioners and that they have no criminal antecedents. However, the learned Government Advocate opposed the application on the ground of the severity and brutality of the murder and submitted that the investigation is still in progress. Considering the gravity of the offence, the allegations made against the petitioners in the FIR, and the pendency of the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail petition is dismissed. 21-07-2026 JRS To

1.The Inspector of Police Manalmedu Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District. Crime No.222 of 2026.

¶2The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Page3 of 4 CRLoOPoNo.o19215oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. JRS CRLoOPoNo.o19215oofo2026 21-07-2026 Page4oofo4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1.Chellaiyan S/o Govindhasamy 2.Kala W/o. Chellaiyan, ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by, The Inspector of Police Manalmedu Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District. Crime No.222 of 2026. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, toenlarge the Petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Cr.No.222 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner(s): Mr. C T Saravanan For Respondent(s): Mrs. R.S.Indira, Govt.Advocate (crl.Side)