Hari Das v. State Rep. By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.08.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN 1.Mr.Hari Das, S/o Gopinath 2.Mr.Gopinath S/o Narayanan 3.Mrs.Sathi W/o Gopinath All are residing at No.70, Sathya Nagar, 2nd Cross Street, Padi, Chennai, Tiruvallur 600 050.
..Petitioner/Accused No.not ranked /versus/ 1.State rep.by the Inspector of Police All Women Police Station-Thirumangalam Second Floor to V7 Police Station Mogappair Eri Scheme Mogappair East, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600 037.
..Respondent/Complainant 2.M.R.Remya, F/A 36 years W/o Haridas Permanently residing at Madathil House, Cherai P.O., Ernakulam Kerala 683 514, 1/7
Presently residing at "STANZA LIVING', Shuman House, M.K.N.Road, Ramapuram, Collector's Nagar, Alandur, Chennai 600 016.
..2nd Respondent/Intervener/ Defacto complainant (R2 is impleaded as 2nd respondent by order of this court dated 18.08.2025 by Dr.GJJ) Prayer:
Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.not known of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners :Mr.Sumathi Lokesh For 1st Respondent :Mr.L.Baskaran Govt.Advocate (Crl.Side) For Defacto Complainant/2nd Respondent :Mr.D.Prasenna
O R D E R
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police, for the alleged offence punishable under Section 85 of BNS 2023 in Crime No.not known of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the complainant Remya, got 2/7
married to one G.Haridas at Sreekrishna Temple Guruvayur, Kerala on 10.02.2022. Due to matrimonial discord the complaint has been registered on 07.04.2025 against her husband Haridas.
3.The specific allegation is made against this petitioners is that the sreedhana property of the defacto complainant is held by them and the defacto complainant has been badly subjected to the dowry harassment. 4.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 submitted that already divorce petition has been filed and the same is pending.
5. There is an intervenor application by the defacto complainant as an intervener, reiterating the averments made in the complaint.
6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) states that the investigation is in progress.
3/7
7.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with stringent conditions.
8. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest or on their appearance, on or before 28.08.2025 before the learned XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a likesum 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:
(a)If the petitioners fail to surrender before the concerned Magistrate on or before 28.08.2025, 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 4/7
Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;
(c)The petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily twice at 10.30 a.m., and 05.30p.m., for a period of 30 days and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; (d)The defacto complainant shall give details of the locker and other information regarding the seethana property to enable the police to make enquiry and retrieve the jewels. (e)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];
(f)If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.
18.08.2025 5/7
ari To 1.The XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. 2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station-Thirumangalam Second Floor to V7 Police Station,Mogappair Eri Scheme Mogappair East, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600 037.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
ari 6/7
18.08.2025 7/7