M.Sudheer v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.08.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN 1.M.Sudheer 2.P.Meenatshi 3.S.Muralidharan ... Petitioners Vs.

1.The State rep by, The Inspector of Police, W-17-Sembium All Women Police Station, Chennai-600 011.

(Crime No.18 of 2025) 2.R.Yamini ... Respondents 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 pending investigation in W-17 Sembium All Women Police Station, Chennai, in Crime No.18 of 2025 on the file of the respondent herein. 1/6

For Petitioners :

Mr.T.S.Sasikumar for Mr.A.Jotheeswaran For Respondents :

Mr.S.Udayakumar for R1 Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Mr.E.Ashokumar for R2

O R D E R

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 506(i) IPC @ 498(A), 323, 506(i) IPC & 3(1)(r), 3(1) (s), 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act, 1989, in Crime No.18 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. This petition is for anticipatory bail on the complaint given by the wife of the first petitioner and 2nd and 3rd petitioners are the in-laws of the defacto complainant. Though, the complaint given trapping of SC/ST offence, the fact remains that the defacto complainant had married the first petitioner 2 1⁄2 years ago and due to matrimonial discord, divorce petition is pending and in such circumstances, a complaint under SC/ST against the husband and in-laws been lodged and taken up for investigation in Crime No.18 of 2025 by Sembium All Women Police Station.

2/6

3. After notice to the defacto complainant, the matter is taken up for consideration. The learned counsel for the defacto complainant would submit that when the defacto complainant went to the in-law's house, she was prevented from entering the house because of her community. Also still more allegations which are the nature of matrimonial dispute been made against these petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police while opposing for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners, reiterated the prosecution case.

5. Heard the learned counsels and perused the materials available on record.

6. This Court is of the view that the first petitioner and the defacto complainant got married on 11.05.2023 as per self respect marriage procedure. The present complaint is made on 10.07.2025. The first petitioner by the time had initiated divorce proceedings before the VII Additional Family Court, Chennai and the same is pending in HMOP.No.3152 of 2025. In the said circumstances, anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners with certain conditions; 3/6

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, on or before 04.09.2025, before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [a] if the petitioners fail to surrender before the concerned Magistrate on or before 04.09.2025, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;

[b] 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; [c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [d] 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 4/6

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];

[e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

25.08.2025 dna To 1.The Principal Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

2.The Inspector of Police, W-17-Sembium All Women Police Station, Chennai-600 011.

(Crime No.18 of 2025) 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

dna 25.08.2025 6/6