Lakshmi v. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 140, 296(b), 115(2), 351(3), 308(4) and 318(4) of the BNS, 2023, in Crime No.77 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that, owing to a financial dispute between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, the petitioners allegedly intimidated the defacto complainant with dire consequences. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners are willing to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court and prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail, reiterated the prosecution case and, on instructions, submitted that the petitioners have no bad antecedents.

¶5Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature of the allegations and the absence of any adverse antecedents on the part of the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

¶6Accordingly, the petitioners are 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 learned Judicial Magistrate – II, Arakkonam, 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, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioner(s) 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(s) shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter 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(s) in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner(s) 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 petitioner(s) thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

30.04.2026 Jeni To

¶1The learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Arakkonam.

¶2The Inspector of Police, Nemili Police Station, Ranipet District

¶3The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. Jeni Crl.O.P.No.10893 of 2026

30.04.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 30.04.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.No.10893 of 2026 1. Lakshmi 2. Eswaran 3. Prabu ... Petitioner(s) Vs. State represented by the Inspector of Police, Nemili Police Station, Ranipet District. Crime No.77 of 2026 ... Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023 to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of hi arrest in connection with Crime No. 77 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s) : Mr.N.Mahendra Babu For Respondent(s) : Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)