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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP NO.15980 of 2025 1.Kuppu 2.Mahalakshmi 3.Vijayalakshmi

...Petitioners/A1 - A3

Vs The State Rep By The Inspector of Police, Gingee Police Station, Villupuram District.

(Crime No.188 of 2025) ...Respondent/Complainant Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.188 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.Vetrivel Bhaskaran For Respondent : Mr.B.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Page No.1 of 7

ORDER

The petitioners/A1 to A3, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 85 of BNS in Crime No.188 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The first petitioner/A1 is the mother-in-law, the second and third petitioners/A2 and A3 are the sisters-in-law of the de-facto complainant's daughter. The first petitioner's son was married to the de-facto complainant's daughter. The allegations against the petitioners are that they demanded additional dowry from the de-facto complainant's daughter and subjected her to cruelty, and she attempted suicide by cutting her wrist. Due to timely medical treatment, she survived. Hence the case.

3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners/A1 to A3 is that the de-facto complainant's daughter had not made any complaint against her husband, i.e., the son of the first petitioner/A1 and brother of the petitioners two and three/A2 and A3; that it is a case of dowry demand; that the first petitioner's daughter-in-law and her husband are living separately; Page No.2 of 7

and that the petitioners have nothing to do with their matrimonial life. Hence, he prays for a grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that in this case, the de-facto complainant's daughter, who is the daughter-in-law of the first petitioner and the sister-inlaw of the second and third petitioners, had attempted suicide by cutting her wrist; that the victim was admitted to JIPMER Hospital, Puducherry, on 01.05.2025; and that thereafter, a dying declaration was recorded, in which the victim had clearly stated about the petitioners/A1 to A3. He further submitted that the victim had not made any complaint against her husband. 5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels on either side, the facts that it is the case of the dowry demand, further, the first Page No.3 of 7

petitioner is residing separately from her son, the second and third petitioners are married, they are living separately with their respective families, which is far away from the victim's house, and there is no complaint against the victim's husband, 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 Judicial Magistrate Gingee, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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, and on proof of payment of deposits, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

[a] if the petitioners fails to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled; Page No.4 of 7

[b] The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the Application for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

[c] the petitioners shall appear before the respondent Police as and when required for the interrogation; [d] the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the defacto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a Police office as and when required; [f] the petitioners to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for Police custody beyond the first fifteen days, they shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard; [g] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[h] 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 Page No.5 of 7

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];

[i] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

03.06.2025 dk To:

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Gingee.

2.The Inspector of Police, Gingee Police Station, Villupuram District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court Madras.

Page No.6 of 7

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

dk CRL.OP.No.15980 of 2025 03.06.2025 Page No.7 of 7