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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.O.P.No.20837 of 2025 1.Rajadurai 2.Kamatchi 3.Chinnadhurai .. Petitioners Vs.

The State rep by The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, Neyveli, Cuddalore District.

Crime No.29 of 2025.

... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S, to enlarge the petitioners/accused - 1 to 3 on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with the Crime No.29 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police.

For Petitioners :

Mr.Gandhi Kumar Kalyanasundram For Respondent :

Mr.S.Udayakumar, Government Advocate (Crl.side) *******

O R D E R

The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 85, 296(b), 351(2) of BNS, in Crime No.29 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioners /accused 1 to 3 submit that the prosecution case is 1/6

based on a complaint by the de-facto complainant, Devadharshini, W/o.Rajadurai. She alleged that after marrying Rajadurai (A1) on 02.03.2025, he failed to work, frequently quarrelled with her, and demanded 5 sovereigns of gold and a twowheeler as dowry. At the instigation of his parents, Chinnadurai (A2) and Kamatchi (A3), A1 allegedly abused and assaulted her after consuming alcohol. Unable to bear the torture, she returned to her parents' house with their six month old child. On 18.05.2025 at about 10.00P.M., A1, under the influence of alcohol, allegedly assaulted her parents, damaged household articles, and forcibly took the child, threatening to kill him by hanging him upside down. On neighbours' intervention, he left the child and fled. Based on this complaint, F.I.R in Crime No.29 of 2025 was registered.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that they have no way connected with the alleged occurrence and they have been falsely implicated in this case. However, the learned counsel, on instructions, further submits that the petitioners, without prejudice to his rights, are ready to deposit some amount to the credit of the crime number as imposed by this Court. Hence, the learned counsel prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the 2/6

respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record .

6. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to A1. However, as regards A2 and A3, anticipatory bail is granted with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners/A2 and A3 are ordered to be released on bail on their executing 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 learned District Munsiff-Cum-Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli, Cuddalore District, and on further conditions that:

[a] 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 Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [b] the second petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required and the third petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] The petitioners shall make himself available for 3/6

interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required; [d] the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses; [e] 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;

[f] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 08.09.2025 nvi Note:

4/6

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To:

1. The District Munsiff-Cum-Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli, Cuddalore District.

2. The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, Neyveli, Cuddalore District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J., 5/6

nvi 08.09.2025 6/6