Allowed

Karthik @ Karthik Raja v. State, rep by. The Sub Inspector of Police

Madras HC23 Feb 2026CRL OP/4385/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case involving damage to property. The Court granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions including deposit of damage cost and daily police reporting.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to deposit of Rs. 20,000, execution of bond with sureties, and daily police reporting for three weeks.

Karthik @ Karthik Raja Vs State, rep by. The Sub Inspector… — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CRL OP No. 4385 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 23-02-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶6

CRL OP No. 4385 of 2026

¶7

Karthik @ Karthik Raja No. 4/2, Muthalamman Kovil Street, Annaikattu, Lathur, Kancheepuram District.

¶8

..Petitioner(s)

¶9

¶10

State, rep by. The Sub Inspector of Police, Anaicut Police Station, Chengalpattu District. (Crime No 12 of 2026)

¶11

..Respondent(s)

¶12

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No. 12 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police and thus rendering justice.

¶13

For Petitioner(s): Tamilselvan A For Respondent(s): M/S.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 324(4), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(2) of BNS in Crime No.12 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶16

Page1 of 5

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

CRL OP No. 4385 of 2026

¶19

The allegation against the petitioner is that there was a previous enmity between the de facto complainant and the petitioner, and this petitioner entered into the house of the defacto complainant and damaged the household articles including windows and two bikes and caused damage to the extent of Rs.20,000/-. Hence, the case has been registered.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is falsely alleged that the petitioner has caused those damages; however, without prejudice to his interest, he is ready to deposit the damage cost. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶21

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the investigation in this case is pending. Hence, she vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶22

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶23

Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/(Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) to the credit of Crime No.12 of 2026 before the concerned Court. On such deposit, the petitioner is ordered to be released on

¶24

Page2 of 5

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

CRL OP No. 4385 of 2026

¶27

bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15)

¶28

days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned District Cum Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyur, on condition that the petitioner

¶29

shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand

¶30

only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition:

¶31

(a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned 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;

¶32

(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;

¶33

(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks. (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 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];

¶34

__________ Page3 of 5

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

CRL OP No. 4385 of 2026

¶37

(e) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

23-02-2026

MPA

1.The District Cum Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyur.

¶42

State, rep by. The Sub Inspector of Police, Anaicut Police Station, Chengalpattu District. (Crime No 12 of 2026)

¶43

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶44

__________ Page4 of 5

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

CRL OP No. 4385 of 2026

¶47

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

¶48

MPA

¶49

CRL OP No. 4385 of 2026

¶50

23-02-2026

¶51

__________ Page5 of 5

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Karthik @ Karthik Raja v. State, rep by. The Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karthik @ Karthik Raja v. State, rep by. The Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Saranya Vs Inspector of Police (Crime)

Arunagiri Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police

M. Karthik Vs State rep. by The Inspector of Police

Naveenkumar Vs The State rep by

Sudalainathan Vs The Inspector of Police

Abt Mahalingam @ M. Mahalingam (Male, 46 years), Vs The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police