Sagayamary v. State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10-09-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
1. Sagayamary
2. Vincent
3. Shalini Petitioners Vs State rep by, The Inspector of Police, T-1 Ambattur Police Station, Tiruvallur District. Crime No.227 of 2025 Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent police concerned in Crime No.227 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners:
Mr.Nagoor Moideen M For Respondent(s):
Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2) & 85 of BNS, in Crime No.227 of 2025, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that on 08.03.2025, at around 1.15 pm, Arakkia Emily (24), allegedly self-immolated near her matrimonial home due to persistent domestic harassment and cruelty. Her mother, Reetha Mary, filed a complaint stating that Emily's husband, Robert Raj (A1), had been physically and mentally abusing her since their marriage on January 20, 2022. On the day of the incident, a quarrel ensued when Emily asked for her unpaid salary, and Roberty Raj allegedly responded harshly, threatened divorce, and made derogatory remarks, leading to Emily setting herself on fire in a state of emotional distress. Robert Raj and his mother, Sagayamary (A3), allegedly tried to extinguish the fire and shifted Emily to KMC Hospital. The case initially registered as accidental/self-inflicted burns was later altered to include charges of abetment of suicide and cruelty against Robert Raj, his father (A2), mother
(A3), and sister (A4) under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
3.The learned counsel appearing for the 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 raised objection and stating that as per the dying declaration, the husband and in-laws of the deceased are the reason for her death and the RDO report also reveals that due to harassment made by the in-laws and husband, she committed suicide. He would submit that at this stage, if they were released on anticipatory bail, they would tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation and the investigation is not yet completed. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.
5.On considering the facts and circumstances of the case and according to prosecution, wife of A1 made to die due to the harassment made by A1 and the in-laws of the deceased and investigation is at the initial stage and at this stage, if they are released on anticipatory bail, they may abscond and there is possibility of tampering the witnesses and hampering the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 10-09-2025 gbi Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes
To 1.State rep by, The Inspector of Police, T-1 Ambattur Police Station, Tiruvallur District. Crime No.227 of 2025.
2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
T.V.THAMILSELVI J.
gbi CRL OP No. 21135 of 10-09-2025