Jothimani v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07-05-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

1. Jothimani

2. Dhanalakshmi ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police W31, AWPS ST. Thomas Mount Police Station Chennai-600016.

Crime No.0007/2026.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in Crime No.7 of 2026 pending on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.M Gunasekarn For Respondent(s):

Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 308, 351(3) of

BNS, 2023 and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman (Amendment) Act, 2002, in Crime No.7 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are ranked as Accused Nos.2 and 3, the complainant name is Sharmila wife of Ganesan, we got married in the year 2019 in two children were born to us. She working as a Makeup Artist she came into contact with the accused through Facebook in 2024. The accused claimed to be unmarried and developed a close relationship with her. Over time, the accused gained her trust and began borrowing money from her, citing various personal and financial difficulties. The complainant transferred money multiple times on 23.02.2025 through Ring App and Google Pay between 2024 and 2025. The accused allegedly had physical relations with the complainant. As a result, the complainant became pregnant. On 12.06.2025, she underwent an abortion at STN Family Care Hospital. Even after this, the accused continued to demand money and allegedly took additional amounts, the accused later avoided contact, blocked her calls and refused to repay the money. He also blocked her on social media and stopped communication. Hence this case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioners have not

committed any offence. He seeks this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the offences committed by the petitioners are serious in nature.

5. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel on either side, if the petitioners granted anticipatory bail the petitioners indulging in similar activities, and this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 07-05-2026 RNA To

1. The Inspector of Police W31, AWPS ST. Thomas Mount Police Station Chennai-600016.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

RNA 07-05-2026