Purushothaman v. The State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

1. Purushothaman

2. Jayanthi

3. Rekha ..Petitioners Vs The State rep.by Station House Officer, All Women Police Station, Puducherry. Crime No.0006 of 2026.

..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant an anticipatory bail to the petitioners in event of their arrest in Crime No.0006/2026 pending on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners:

Mr.Gopalakrishnan B For Respondent:

Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 3(5), 316 and 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Section 34, 405 & 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860), in Crime No. 0006 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that based on the order passed by the learned Mahila Court, Puducherry in Crl.M.P.No.2576 of 2025, a complaint was given by the defacto complainant alleging that after her marriage with her husband, she was subjected to harassment and dowry demand by her husband and the present petitioners. It is further alleged that she was ill-treated, not provided even the basic amenities and was sent away from the matrimonial home. Hence, the case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the petitioners 1 & 2 are the in-laws of the defacto complainant and they have not interfered in the matrimonial life of the defacto complainant and her husband. It is further submitted that the marriage took place in the year 2012 and the defacto complainant left the matrimonial home nearly 8 years ago and was residing separately in her parental house. The learned counsel would submit that the complaint has been lodged with inordinate delay with an intention to harass the petitioners. Hence, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the allegations are serious in nature and relate to

matrimonial cruelty and harassment. It is further submitted that there are no previous cases pending against the petitioners.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

6. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

7. 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 is made ready, before the learned Mahila Court, Puducherry, on condition that the petitioners execute a bond each for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) 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 conditions 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 respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m, until further orders;

[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 BNS.

29-04-2026 NSL To

1. The Station House Officer, All Women Police Station, Puducherry.

2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

3. The Mahila Court, Puduchery.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

NSL 29-04-2026