High Court · 2025

Crl.O.P.No.19546 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 30.07.2025CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMARCrl.O.P.No.19546 of 20251.Jayaraman2. Suguna3. Katherasan ... PetitionersVs.State Rep. byThe Inspector of Police,K-3, Aminjikarai Police Station,Aminjikarai, Chennai.Crime No.309 of 2022. ... RespondentPRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioners on anticipatory bail in Crime No.309 of 2022 pending on the file of Inspector of Police, K-3, Aminjikarai Police Station, Aminjikarai, Chennai.For Petitioners:M/s.C.BalajiFor Respondent:Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam,Government Advocate (Crl. Side)O R D E RThe petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 174(3) of Cr.P.C thereafter altered 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.19546 of 2025u/s.306 of I.P.C.1860 in W.L.O.R.No.6 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are the in-laws of the complainant as well as the deceased. It is alleged that due to dowry harassment meted out by the petitioners and the husband of the deceased (A1), the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself. Hence the case.3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that on 10.07.2022, the deceased committed suicide, immediately one Kalaivendan (A1) who is her husband had lodged a complaint before the respondent and thereafter, sent a representation to the authorities. Subseqeuntly, an enquiry has been conducted by the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), upon completion of the enquiry, had confirmed that there were no proof with regard to dowry harassment. Further, the complainant is relying upon a purported suicide note, found at their residence, which was handed over to the Revenue Divisional Officer only after a delay of one week from the date of incident, thereby raising serious doubts about its genuineness and indicating that 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.19546 of 2025it is fabricated document. He further submits that although, the incident is said to have occurred on 10.07.2022, the respondent police remained inactive for an extended period and, for reasons best known to them, have now suddenly exercised force and arrested A1 on 25.06.2025. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the father of the deceased had sent a representation to the District Collector making wild allegations against the petitioners and A1, as if her daughter was subjected to cruelty and he has also sent a suicide note along with the said representation. He further submits that at present, the petitioners were arrested and final report has to be filed. Hence, vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.5. The learned counsel for the intervenor submits that due to dowry harassment and ill-treatment of the petitioners and A1, the deceased had committed suicide. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.19546 of 2025to the petitioners.6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.7. Though it is the claim of the complainant that the deceased died only because of the petitioners and A1 seeking dowry, however, it is clear from the enquiry report submitted by the Revenue Divisional officer that there was no dowry harassment. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either sides and in the light of the report submitted by the Revenue Divisional Officer and since, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.8. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.19546 of 2025or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:[a] if the petitioners fail to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity;[c] the first petitioner shall report before the respondent as and when required for interrogation and the petitioners 2 and 3 shall report before the respondent police for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial and they shall make themselves available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;[e] the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;;[f] the petitioners to give an undertaking that if required 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.19546 of 2025for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard; [g] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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 vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];[h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.30.07.20251/2rapTo1. The V Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai 2. The Inspector of Police, K-3, Aminjikarai Police Station, Aminjikarai, Chennai.3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.19546 of 2025M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.rapCrl.O.P.No.19546 of 202530.07.20251/27/7