T.Shanthi v. The State Rep by the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3) and 340(2) of BNS in Crime No.29 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the de facto complainant's father were in live-in relationship and he also submitted some photographs in this regard. He would further submit that according to the averments made in the affidavit, the petitioner has filed a suit for declaration. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶3The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police strongly objected the grant of anticipatory bail and reiterated the prosecution case.

¶4Though certain allegations made in the FIR, considering the fact that the petitioner is a woman and the occurrence took place during 2025 and the FIR came to be registered during May, 2026, this Court is of the firm view that at this length of time, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions. Page3 of 4

¶5Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned XXVIII Magistrate, CCB & CBCID Metro case Egmore, Chennai, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a 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 petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, as and when required for interrogation;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as Page4 of 4 C.KUMARAPPAN.

J . KMI laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

6.This Criminal Original Petition is ordered accordingly. 27-07-2026 KMI To

1.The XXVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, CCB & CBCID Metro Case, Egmore, Chennai.

2.The Inspector of Police, CCB-I Police Station, Chennai.

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN T.Shanthi No.10/A, North Street, Kennedy Street, T.V.K. Nagar, Perambur, Chennai 600011. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep by The Inspector of Police CCB-I, Police Station, Chennai. Crime no.29 of 2026. ..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the petitioner/accused on anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest in Crime no.29 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police on such terms and conditions as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper. For Petitioner(s): Mr.Yuvaamannar A For Respondent(s): Mr.N.Palanivel, Govt.Advocate (Crl.Side) ****** Page2 of 4