Chellaiah And Others vs State

K.K. Ramakrishnan, J

The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.47 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police and they have filed this Criminal Original Petition seeking anticipatory bail.

It is alleged that the petitioners and other unknown persons conspired and murdered the son of the de facto complainant, namely Praveen Kumar, on 02.05.2026 at around 03:00 p.m. Accordingly, an FIR was registered for the aforesaid offences under Section 103 of the BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, as amended in 2008.

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners have been falsely implicated and that the case of accidental death has been camouflaged as a murder case at the instigation of the de facto complainant and certain political parties. Therefore, the petitioners have filed this Criminal Original Petition seeking anticipatory bail.

On 07.05.2026, this Court had passed the following order :

" Issue notice to the third respondent / defacto complainant, returnable by 04.06.2026. Private notice is also permitted.

The defacto complainant is directed to receive the body, since the present petition will be considered only after the post-mortem is conducted.

List the matter on 04.06.2026. Till then, the respondent police shall not harass the petitioners."

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor made a special mention before the Vacation Court on 13.05.2026, stating that, in view of the interim order passed by this Court during the first vacation on 07.05.2026 directing the police not to harass the petitioners, the Investigating Officer was unable to proceed with the investigation. He further submitted that, in cases involving offences under Section 3(2)

(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and Section 103 of the BNS, an anticipatory bail petition is ordinarily not maintainable. He also submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, on various occasions, has issued directions restraining Courts from passing orders such as "not to harass the petitioners," as such orders hamper the investigation.He further produced the post-mortem certificate, the statements recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023, and other materials, and contended that there exists a clear case of murder and not an accident, as argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

Upon production of the post-mortem certificate, he also submitted that the allegations made in the First Information Report that murder was committed prima facie substantiated with the preliminary opinion given by the post-mortem Doctor.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no bar to entertain the present anticipatory bail application under the Act.

The Honourable Judge of this Court, after considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case at that stage, granted an order of interim protection to the petitioners on 07.05.2026, and there is no occasion to vacate the same. The case was specifically adjourned to 04.06.2026.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, at the cost of repetition, submitted that, in view of the interim order, the Investigating Officer is unable to proceed with the investigation.

This Court considered the rival submissions and perused the records produced by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel for the petitioners.

The case of the petitioners is that the occurrence was a pure accident, which, according to them, is evident from the photographs annexed in the typed set of papers. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor produced the very same photographs and contended that it is not a case of accident, but one of murder, as alleged in the complaint.

This Court is not inclined to go into the rival contentions based on the materials produced at this stage. However, considering the nature of the offences under Section 103 of the BNS read with Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, this Court is inclined to vacate the following portion of the order dated 07.05.2026:

List the matter on 04.06.2026. Till then, the respondent police shall not harass the petitioners."

Accordingly, the following portion of the interim order granted by this Court on 07.05.2026 is hereby vacated:

List the matter on 04.06.2026. Till then, the respondent police shall not harass the petitioners."

For filing counter on the side of the 1st and 2nd respondents, list the matter on 02.06.2026. In the meantime, the petitioners are directed to serve notice on the 3rd respondent.