P.Amarnath v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11-07-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR
1. P.Amarnath
2. P.Aravinth Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Cuddalore District. (Crime No. 22 of 2024) Respondent(s) PRAYER This Criminal Original Petition is filed to enlarge the Petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent police concerned in Crime No. 22 of 2024, on the file of Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Cuddalore District.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.S.Kasirajan For Respondent(s):
M/s. Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam GA (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 342, 417, 376, 294(2) of IPC 1860 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in Crime No.22 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the son of the A1 had cheated the defaco complainant under the pretext of false promise to marry her. The other accused have demanded more dowry from the defacto complainant and harassed her. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this the second anticipatory bail application and the earlier the petitioners were granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.06.2024 made in Crl.O.P.No.13661 of 2024, with certain conditions, however, the petitioners were unable to execute the surety within a stipulated time, resulting in the expiry of the conditional order. Now, the petitioners are ready to furnish the substantial sureties for their due release
on anticipatory bail. Hence, the learned counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
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 counsel appearing on either sides and since, custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not required, 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 made ready, before the learned Additional Mahila Court, Cuddalore on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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, 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;
[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 report before the respondent police as and when required for 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, he 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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];
[i] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.
11-07-2025 jai To 1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Cuddalore District.
2. The Additional District Mahila Court, Cuddalore.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.
jai CRL OP No. 18142 of 11-07-2025