R.Raja v. State of Tamil Nadu Rep. By, the Inspector of Police,

ORDER The petitioner, apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 296 (b), 351 (2) of BNS and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, in Crime No.83 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the defacto-complainant. During this dispute, the petitioner Page2 of 4 abused the defacto-complainant in filthy language and assaulted her. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions made on either side, this Court is of the firm view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

¶6Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Metropolitan Page3 of 4 Magistrate Court, Saidapet, 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [a] 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, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one month and thereafter, as and when required for further interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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]; [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 07-05-2026 ep/sma Page4 of 4

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J. ep To

1.The Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet.

2.The Inspector of Police, Mambalam Police Station, Chennai.

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras. 07-05-2026

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 07-05-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI R.Raja ..Petitioner(s) Vs State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Mambalam Police Station, Chennai. Crime No.83 of 2016 ..Respondent(s) Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS Act, pleased to enlarge the Petitioner on Bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.83 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Mambalam Police Station, Chennai. For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Varun For Respondent(s): Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Criminal side)