Priyakumari v. The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :08.09.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
1. Priyakumari
2. Jayavendhan ... Petitioners Vs.
The Inspector of Police, Pallikonda Police Station, Vellore, Vellore District.
(Crime No.78 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.78 of 2025 on the file of respondent police.
For Petitioners : Mr.Thangavel.M.R For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) *******
O R D E R
The petitioners, who were arrested for the alleged offence under Section 194(3)(iii) of BNSS and later altered to section 108 of BNS (Corresponding section 174 of Cr.P.C and altered to section 306 of Indian Penal Code), in Crime No.78 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
1/7
2. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant's daughter married Rohith on 02.06.2024 with both families' consent. She was allegedly harassed by her husband for consuming alcohol, dowry demands, and stridhana articles. On 06.05.2025, she made a video call to her husband (petitioner's son) stating she would commit suicide. The petitioner's son and his brother, with the help of the complainant's brother, broke open the door, rescued her, and took her to CMC Hospital, where doctors declared her dead during transportation. Based on the complaint, enquiry is pending. The petitioners, being husband and wife, submit that the complainant's wife Jayanthi (a Sub-Inspector) was their family friend, and due to that relationship, the marriage was arranged between their son and the complainant's daughter.
Later, due to the egoistic behavior of the de-facto complainant's wife, the couple separated. As she is working as a SubInspector in the respondent police station, the petitioners alleged that, in the name of enquiry, the case is being misused. The petitioners submits that their son was harassed and had retrieved all stridhana articles. On 26.11.2024, the de-facto complainant's daughter, fearing her mother would not let her live peacefully, threatened to commit suicide.
where she was found dead. Subsequently, due to continued threats, the petitioner's son attempted suicide on 08.05.2025 by consuming poison but was saved. On 13.05.2025, he committed suicide by hanging, leaving a note blaming his in-laws. Based on a complaint by the first petitioner, the police registered FIR in Crime No.82 of 2025 under Section 194 of BNSS (corresponding to Section 174 Cr.P.C) for investigation.
3. The learned counsel appearing for petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. He further submitted that the investigation is almost complete.
5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and perused the materials available on record.
3/7
6.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties ( Out of which one surety should be a blood surety), each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-V, Vellore District , and on further conditions that: [a] if the petitioners failed to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;
[b] 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;
[c] the first petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required and the second petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Tuesday at 10.30a.m., for a period of three months and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; 4/7
[d]the petitioners shall co-operate with the proceedings and, if directed, will hand over any stridhana articles in their possession to the de-facto complainant; [e]the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness during trial;
[f]the petitioners shall not abscond during trial; [g]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]; and;
[h]if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
08.09.2025 nvi Note :
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.
5/7
To
1. The Inspector of Police, Pallikonda Police Station, Vellore, Vellore District.
2.The Judicial Magistrate-V, Vellore District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
6/7
T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.
nvi 08.09.2025 7/7