Sathya @ Sathiya v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Inamkulathur

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 11.08.2026 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice K.MURALI SHANKAR Sathya @ Sathiya ... Petitioner/ Accused No.5

Vs The State of Tamilnadu represented by The Inspector of Police, Inamkulathur Police Station, Trichy City. (Crime No.182 of 2026)

...Respondent/ Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.B.Jameelarasu, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Counsel for State of TN(Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Section 482 of B.N.S.S. PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.182 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / fifth accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 296(b), 115(2), 74 and 351(2) BNS, in Crime No.182 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant has been living separately with her children from her husband for more than 5 years, that the defacto complainant was performing temple work at the first accused's temple for more than a year, that during the first week of January 2026, the first accused approached the defacto complainant and insisted her to accept his sexual intention, that when the defacto complainant refused the same and demanded the repayment of Rs.25,000/- previously given to the first accused, the other accused persons including the petitioner herein harassed her and insisted her to accept the first accused's sexual demands and that on 23.01.2026 and again on

26.06.2026, when the defacto complainant reiterated her demand for repayment, the accused persons attacked her and abused her in filthy language and also attempted to remove her saree. Hence, the complaint.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution, that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and that the entire allegations are totally false and concocted one. He would further submit that the accused 2 and 3 were already arrested and released on bail and that the petitioner is not having any bad antecedents.

¶4The learned Counsel for State of TN (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioner is the wife of the second accused, that the defacto complainant has specifically alleged the involvement of the petitioner in her complaint and that the petitioner along with other accused allegedly insisted the defacto complainant to accept the first accused's sexual demands and harassed her in that regard.

¶5Considering the seriousness and gravity of the offence alleged as against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶6In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. (K M S J)

11.08.2026 CSM TO

1.The Inspector of Police, Inamkulathur Police Station, Trichy City.

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

K.MURALI SHANKAR,J CSM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.16903 of 2026 Date : 11.08.2026