M.S.Prashanth v. The State Rep. By, the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 192, 196(1)(a), 353 (1)(c), 353 (2) BNS 2023 in Crime No.06 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail. Page2 of 5

¶2The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is alleged to have posted comments about muslims on the social media and alleged to have posted a false message in a video with the intention of destroying religious harmony between the Muslims and Hindu community and creating conflict saying that some people belong to Muslim religion are beating up Hindu people. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the sole breadwinner of the family and is having permanent residence in this city. He further submitted that the petitioner has realised his mistake and immediately deleted the said post and further submitted that such kind of mistake will not repeated again. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the Instagram account of the petitioner has been blocked. However, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Page3 of 5

¶5Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the facts and circumstances of the case; taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side); considering the totality of the circumstances and nature of the allegation and considering the age of the petitioner, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

¶7Accordingly, the petitioner is 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 No.11 Saidapet 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 Page4 of 5 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, everyday 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 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 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. 20-08-2026 SHL To:

¶1The Judicial Magistrate No.11 Saidapet Chennai.

¶2The Inspector of Police CCW-Chennai, CCD I Chennai District,

¶3The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras CRLoOPoNo.o22624oofo2026 N.RAMESHoJ. SHL CRLoOPoNo.o22624oofo2026 20-08-2026 Page5oofo5

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.RAMESH M.S.Prashanth ..Petitioner Vs The State Rep. by, The Inspector of Police CCW-Chennai, CCD I Chennai District. Crime No.06 of 2026. ..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the Petitioner on anticipatory Bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.06 of 2026 on the file of Inspector of Police CCW-Chennai, CCD I Chennai District/Respondent Police. For Petitioner: Mr.T Shanmugam For Respondent: Mr.R.Rajasekaran Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side)