High Court · 2025

CRL.OP(MD). No.3334 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 17.03.2025PRESENTTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVELCRL.OP(MD). No.3334 of 20251.Ram Vignesh2.Meenalochani3.Gunaseharan... Petitioners/ A1 to A3Vs.The State of Tamil nadu rep by the Inspector of Police,All Women Police Station,Srirangam, Trichy District.Crime No.6 of 2025 ... Respondent /ComplainantPRAYER :- The Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 praying to enlarge the petitioners /A1 to A3on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.6 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-Police.For Petitioners :Mr.B.JameelarasuFor Respondent:Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi,Government Advocate(Criminal Side)For Defacto complainant: Mr.Mohan.NORDER : The Court made the following order :-This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners on 19.02.20251/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD). No.3334 of 2025under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, prayingto grant an order of pre-arrest bail.2. The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent- police forthe offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 ofDowry Prohibition Act, 1961, in Crime No.6 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.3. The case of the prosecution is that on 19.03.2018, a marriage was solemnizedbetween the first petitioner and the defacto complainant. The second and thirdpetitioners are in-laws of the defacto complainant. After the marriage of the firstpetitioner and the defacto complainant, they had no good relationship. Due to somehealth ailments, the first petitioner, along with other accused persons, used to harassthe defacto complainant physically and demand more dowry. They also abused thedefacto complainant and also threatened her criminally. Hence, the case. 4. Mr.B.Jameelarasu, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that thepetitioners are innocent persons, and they have not committed any offence as allegedby the prosecution. He further submits that the petitioners have been falselyimplicated in this case. He however submits that the petitioners are ready to abide byany conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He further submits that thepetitioners are ready to hand over 50 sovereigns of gold, which belongs to the defacto2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD). No.3334 of 2025complainant and also other things. Accordingly, he prays to grant an order of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. 5. Per contra, Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, the learned Government Advocate (CriminalSide) appearing for the respondent-police submits that there was a matrimonialdispute between the first petitioner and the defacto complainant. He further submitsthat the husband and in-laws of the defacto complainant harassed the defactocomplainant and thereafter, her demand more dowry, and therefore, if pre-arrest bailis granted to the petitioners, they will cause threat to the defacto complainant and herfamily members. He accordingly prays for dismissal of this petition.6. Heard on both sides. This Court has perused the records.7. Today, the defacto complainant is present. The learned counsel for thepetitioners handed over 50 sovereigns of gold jewels and other things to the defactocomplainant. The defacto complainant also received the same, and to that effect, shefiled an affidavit. The same is recorded. 8. Considering the above and also considering the facts and circumstances ofthe case, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is notnecessary. The petitioners have permanent residence. Hence, there is less possibility3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD). No.3334 of 2025of absconding. Considering the same and with a view to give an opportunity to thepetitioners to reform themselves, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to thepetitioners. Accordingly, pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitioners subject to thefollowing conditions:(i) The petitioners shall be released on pre-arrest bail in the event of their arrestor in the event of their surrender before the learned Judge, Additional Mahila Court,Tiruchirappalli District, within a period of 15 days from the date on which the ordercopy is made ready, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees TenThousand only) each along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the learned Judge, AdditionalMahila Court, Tiruchirappalli District.(ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in theApplication for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules ofPractice, 2019']. The learned Judge shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs toensure their identity.(iii) The petitioners appear and sign before the respondent-police monthly oncei.e., first week of Sunday at 10.00 am., until further orders. (iv) The petitioners make themselves available for interrogation by a policeofficer as and when required.4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD). No.3334 of 2025(v) The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threator promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade themfrom disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.(vi) The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, cause any threat to thedefacto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper the evidence.(vii) The petitioners shall not enter into the defacto complainant's residence andher workplace.(viii) The petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission ofthe Court.(ix) The petitioners shall furnish their residential address and mobile numberto the concerned Judge.(x) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Judge,Additional Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli or Trial Court, as the case may be, isentitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law asif the aforementioned conditions are imposed by him as laid down by the Hon'bleSupreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283]. 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD). No.3334 of 20258. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to theconditions stated supra. sd/- 17/03/2025 / TRUE COPY / /04/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. RmkTO1 THE ADDITIONAL MAHILA JUDGEADDITIONAL MAHILA COURT, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI DISTRICT.2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, SRIRANGAM, TRICHY DISTRICT. 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC to M/s.B. JAMEEL ARASU, Advocate ( SR-2979[I] dated 18/03/2025 ) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.3334 of 2025 Date :17/03/2025 HPS/SAR / 09.04.2025/6P/5CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from17/07/2023. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD). No.3334 of 2025 HPS/SAR / 09.04.2025/7P/CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from17/07/2023. 7/7