← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/4104/2026granted

Sheeba v. State Represented By

2026-02-19Honourable Mr.Justice K.Rajasekar6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19-02-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. Sheeba

2. Thiyagarajan ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Represented by Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Selaiyur Police Station, Chennai.

Crime No.3/2026 ..Respondent(s) Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the Petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest by the Respondent police in Crime No.3/2026 on the file of the Respondent Police pending investigation and pass other necessary and just orders in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):

For Intervenor Mr.Kathiresan K Mr.G.Thirunavukarasu For Respondent(s):

Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 316(2) and 351(2) of BNS 2023, in Crime No.3 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The allegations against the petitioners are that they are the parents of the first accused (A1). It is stated that a relationship developed between A1 and the victim, which subsequently led to a formal betrothal solemnized with the consent of both families. It is further alleged that A1 collected a sum of ₹3 lakhs from the victim, while his mother allegedly demanded an additional ₹50 lakhs and 50 sovereigns of gold as a condition for the marriage. Because these demands were not met by the defacto complainant, the marriage was stalled. Thereafter, the petitioners allegedly subjected the victim to harassment and caused her grievous injuries. It is further alleged that the victim became pregnant and, as a result of continuous harassment, abuse, and threats, suffered a miscarriage, after which she lodged this complaint. 3.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are the parents of A1 and have not caused any injury as alleged in the FIR. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the investigation and have not collected any money from the defacto complainant. However they are willing to return the amount and prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.The learned counsel for the Intervenor submitted that there are severe

allegations against A2 and A3, stating that they physically assaulted and continuously harassed the victim. Being unable to endure such treatment, the victim lodged the complaint. Accordingly, the learned counsel opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that A1 has been arrested and his statement has been recorded. The investigation has revealed that a sum of Rs.3 lakhs was received from the defacto complainant and the same is also used for conducting marriage of A1's sister. Hence, she opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6.Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, and in view of the petitioners' readiness to deposit a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to the credit of Crime No.3 of 2026, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

7.Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) to the credit of Crime Number 3 of 2026 and on such deposit and on receipt of proof of payment, 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 Additional Mahila Court at Alandur, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or 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] the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10:30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation. [c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action 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 vs. State of Kerala

[(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

19-02-2026 GBI To 1.State Represented by Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Selaiyur Police Station, Chennai.

Crime No.3/2026 2.The Additional Mahila Court at Alandur.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

GBI 19-02-2026