CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 AND CRL OP NO. 14219 OF 2026, Crl.O.P.No.14221 of 2026 1. K Chandrakasan, S/o. Kuppusamy, 85-A (MIG), 1st Cross Street, Mogappair East, Mogappair, Ambattur-600 037. 2. C Thilagavathy, W/o. Chandrasekaran, 85-A (MIG) 1st Cross Street, Mogappair East. Mogappair, Ambattur-600 037. ..Petitioner(s) Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep. by The Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station (AWPS), Nolambur, Chennai. Crime No. Not Known of 2026 But as per FIR Crime No.15 of 2026 The Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station (AWPS), Thirumangalam, Chennai. ..Respondent(s) __________ Page1 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 Sri Mari Shathika, D/o.Kathiresan, No.691-HIG TNHB, Mogappair West, Eri Scheme, Ambattur Taluk, Chennai – 600 037. ..Intervenor CRL OP No. 14219 of 2026 1. C.Ganesan S/o.Chinnakannu, 15/1, Jeevanantham 6th Street, Kamaraj Nagar, Tiruvallur-600 071. 2. C.Tamiselvan S/o.Chinnakannu, U/1, G3 Police Quarters, Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station(AWPS), Nolambur, Chennai. Cr.No.not known. But as per FIR Crime No.15 of 2026 The Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station (AWPS), Thirumangalam, Chennai. ..Respondent(s) Sri Mari Shathika, D/o.Kathiresan,

No.691-HIG TNHB, Mogappair West, Eri Scheme, Ambattur Taluk, Chennai – 600 037. ..Intervenor __________ Page2 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 Prayer in CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the Petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No. Not known on the file of the Respondent Police. PRAYER IN CRL OP No. 14219 of 2026 Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Cr.No.Not known on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s): MR.SILAMBANNAN, SENIOR COUNSEL IN BOTH CASES FOR Mr.R.Yogesh For Respondent(s): MR.N.PALANIVEL, IN BOTH CASES GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE) For Intervenor(s): Mr.P.Santhaseelan Common Order The petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.14221 of 2026 are the parents of A1 and the petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.14219 of 2026 are the maternal uncles of A1, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 318, 351(2) r/w 3(5) of BNS Act 2023 @ 296(b), 318(4), 351(2) r/w Section 3(5) of BNS Act, 2023, in Crime No.15 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail. __________ Page3 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026

2. The case of the prosecution is that A2 and A3 arranged a matrimonial alliance for their son A1, who is an Environmental Engineer, with the defacto complainant, an Engineering graduate. After mutual consent of both families, the marriage was fixed on 24.06.2026 and the reception on 03.07.2026, and the marriage expenses to be borne by the petitioners. The engagement was conducted on 12.04.2026, during which both sides exchanged gold ornaments as part of the marriage arrangement. A1 went missing on 28.05.2026 and later married another girl. Shocked by his action, A2 and A3 immediately informed the bride’s family, explained the situation, and apologised. Thereafter, the bride’s family threatened to lodge a criminal complaint against the petitioners. 3. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that A2 and A3 are the parents of A1, A4 and A5 are the maternal uncles of A1. They were nothing to do with the egregious act committed by A1 and they too sympathise with the plight of the defacto complainant. The petitioners are innocent person and they have been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. __________ Page4 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case. However, he opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the Intervenor submitted that the petitioners were in-connivance with A1 and had actively facilitated the commission of offence. The actions of the accused had shattered the dreams of the defacto complainant, caused immense mental agony to the defacto complainant and their family. Hence, he opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, intervenor and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent. 7. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records available. 8. From the submissions on either side, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that A2 and A3 are the parents of A1, while A4 and A5 are the maternal uncles of A1. The marriage between A1 and defacto __________ Page5 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026

complainant was fixed on 24.06.2026. However, prior to the said marriage, A1 had allegedly eloped and married another girl on 28.05.2026. On coming to know of the said incident, the petitioners are stated to have visited the residence of the defacto complainant on 29.05.2026 at about 06.00 a.m. and prostrated at the foot of the defacto complainant's parents and explained their predicament. It is the specific contention of the petitioners that that they were nothing to do with the egregious act committed by A1 and they too sympathise with the plight of the defacto complainant. Considering their age and circumstance, they seek the relief of anticipatory bail. 9. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case. 10. On the other hand, the learned Intervenor Counsel vehemently opposed the petition and submitted that the petitioners were in-connivance with A1 and had actively facilitated the commission of offence. He would invite the attention of this Court about the proclivity of the conduct of the petitioners and according to the intervenor these petitioners are also in-connivance with A1 and committed such an offence and they have shattered the dreams of the defacto complainant and thereby caused immense mental agony to the defacto complainant and therefore submitted, that if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, __________ Page6 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026

it would shock the conscious of the Society at large and prays for dismissal of the anticipatory bail. 11. This Court finds considerable force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the intervenor. However, it is pertinent to note that the petitioners are charged for offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 318, 351(2) r/w 3(5) of BNS Act 2023 @ 296(b), 318(4), 351(2) r/w 3(5) of BNS Act 2023, for which the maximum punishment prescribed is only seven years and furthermore all the petitioners are senior citizens and A3 is a woman and A2 is stated to be suffering from Cancer. In view of the principles laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau Of Investigation reported in (2026 INSC 115) and 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1578, the investigation can be effectively proceed by securing the presence of the petitioners through summons. Hence, this Court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not required and inclined to enlarge them on anticipatory bail. 12. Accordingly, the petitioners are 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 on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambatur, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for __________ Page7 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026

a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioners fail 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 petitioners shall report and sign before the respondent police, everyday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders; (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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 petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 17-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No AH __________ Page8 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 To 1.The Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station (AWPS), Nolambur, Chennai.

Crime No. Not Known of 2026 But as per FIR Crime No.15 of 2026 The Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station (AWPS), Thirumangalam, Chennai. 2.The Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. __________ Page9 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN J. AH CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 AND CRL OP NO. 14219 OF 2026 17-06-2026 2/2 __________ Page10 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 AND CRL OP NO. 14219 OF 2026, Crl.O.P.No.14221 of 2026 1. K Chandrakasan, S/o. Kuppusamy, 85-A (MIG), 1st Cross Street, Mogappair East, Mogappair, Ambattur-600 037. 2. C Thilagavathy, W/o. Chandrasekaran, 85-A (MIG) 1st Cross Street, Mogappair East. Mogappair, Ambattur-600 037. ..Petitioner(s) Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep. by The Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station (AWPS), Nolambur, Chennai. Crime No. Not Known of 2026 But as per FIR Crime No.15 of 2026 The Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station (AWPS), Thirumangalam, Chennai. ..Respondent(s) __________ Page1 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 Sri Mari Shathika, D/o.Kathiresan, No.691-HIG TNHB, Mogappair West, Eri Scheme, Ambattur Taluk, Chennai – 600 037. ..Intervenor CRL OP No. 14219 of 2026 1. C.Ganesan S/o.Chinnakannu, 15/1, Jeevanantham 6th Street, Kamaraj Nagar, Tiruvallur-600 071. 2. C.Tamiselvan S/o.Chinnakannu, U/1, G3 Police Quarters, Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station(AWPS), Nolambur, Chennai. Cr.No.not known. But as per FIR Crime No.15 of 2026 The Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station (AWPS), Thirumangalam, Chennai. ..Respondent(s) Sri Mari Shathika, D/o.Kathiresan,

No.691-HIG TNHB, Mogappair West, Eri Scheme, Ambattur Taluk, Chennai – 600 037. ..Intervenor __________ Page2 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 Prayer in CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the Petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No. Not known on the file of the Respondent Police. PRAYER IN CRL OP No. 14219 of 2026 Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Cr.No.Not known on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s): MR.SILAMBANNAN, SENIOR COUNSEL IN BOTH CASES FOR Mr.R.Yogesh For Respondent(s): MR.N.PALANIVEL, IN BOTH CASES GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE) For Intervenor(s): Mr.P.Santhaseelan Common Order The petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.14221 of 2026 are the parents of A1 and the petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.14219 of 2026 are the maternal uncles of A1, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 318, 351(2) r/w 3(5) of BNS Act 2023 @ 296(b), 318(4), 351(2) r/w Section 3(5) of BNS Act, 2023, in Crime No.15 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail. __________ Page3 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026

2. The case of the prosecution is that A2 and A3 arranged a matrimonial alliance for their son A1, who is an Environmental Engineer, with the defacto complainant, an Engineering graduate. After mutual consent of both families, the marriage was fixed on 24.06.2026 and the reception on 03.07.2026, and the marriage expenses to be borne by the petitioners. The engagement was conducted on 12.04.2026, during which both sides exchanged gold ornaments as part of the marriage arrangement. A1 went missing on 28.05.2026 and later married another girl. Shocked by his action, A2 and A3 immediately informed the bride’s family, explained the situation, and apologised. Thereafter, the bride’s family threatened to lodge a criminal complaint against the petitioners. 3. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that A2 and A3 are the parents of A1, A4 and A5 are the maternal uncles of A1. They were nothing to do with the egregious act committed by A1 and they too sympathise with the plight of the defacto complainant. The petitioners are innocent person and they have been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. __________ Page4 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case. However, he opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the Intervenor submitted that the petitioners were in-connivance with A1 and had actively facilitated the commission of offence. The actions of the accused had shattered the dreams of the defacto complainant, caused immense mental agony to the defacto complainant and their family. Hence, he opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, intervenor and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent. 7. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records available. 8. From the submissions on either side, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that A2 and A3 are the parents of A1, while A4 and A5 are the maternal uncles of A1. The marriage between A1 and defacto __________ Page5 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026

complainant was fixed on 24.06.2026. However, prior to the said marriage, A1 had allegedly eloped and married another girl on 28.05.2026. On coming to know of the said incident, the petitioners are stated to have visited the residence of the defacto complainant on 29.05.2026 at about 06.00 a.m. and prostrated at the foot of the defacto complainant's parents and explained their predicament. It is the specific contention of the petitioners that that they were nothing to do with the egregious act committed by A1 and they too sympathise with the plight of the defacto complainant. Considering their age and circumstance, they seek the relief of anticipatory bail. 9. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case. 10. On the other hand, the learned Intervenor Counsel vehemently opposed the petition and submitted that the petitioners were in-connivance with A1 and had actively facilitated the commission of offence. He would invite the attention of this Court about the proclivity of the conduct of the petitioners and according to the intervenor these petitioners are also in-connivance with A1 and committed such an offence and they have shattered the dreams of the defacto complainant and thereby caused immense mental agony to the defacto complainant and therefore submitted, that if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, __________ Page6 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026

it would shock the conscious of the Society at large and prays for dismissal of the anticipatory bail. 11. This Court finds considerable force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the intervenor. However, it is pertinent to note that the petitioners are charged for offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 318, 351(2) r/w 3(5) of BNS Act 2023 @ 296(b), 318(4), 351(2) r/w 3(5) of BNS Act 2023, for which the maximum punishment prescribed is only seven years and furthermore all the petitioners are senior citizens and A3 is a woman and A2 is stated to be suffering from Cancer. In view of the principles laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau Of Investigation reported in (2026 INSC 115) and 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1578, the investigation can be effectively proceed by securing the presence of the petitioners through summons. Hence, this Court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not required and inclined to enlarge them on anticipatory bail. 12. Accordingly, the petitioners are 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 on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambatur, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for __________ Page7 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026

a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioners fail 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 petitioners shall report and sign before the respondent police, everyday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders; (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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 petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 17-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No AH __________ Page8 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 To 1.The Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station (AWPS), Nolambur, Chennai.

Crime No. Not Known of 2026 But as per FIR Crime No.15 of 2026 The Inspector of Police, W8, All Women Police Station (AWPS), Thirumangalam, Chennai. 2.The Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. __________ Page9 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN J. AH CRL OP No. 14221 of 2026 AND CRL OP NO. 14219 OF 2026 17-06-2026 2/2 __________ Page10 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis