Hari Baskar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu, Represented By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03.10.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR

1. Hari Baskar

2. Uma Maheswari ... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Kolathur K-5 Peravallur AWPS, Chennai.

(Crime No.326 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.326 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : M/s. M. Sakthiguruchitra For Respondent : Mr. S. Santhosh, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

O R D E R

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, r/w Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women (TNPHW) Act, 2002 in connection with the case in Crime No.326 of 2025, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner married the defacto complainant in the year 2021. Thereafter, the first petitioner, along with the second petitioner, who is the mother-in-law of the defacto complainant, demanded dowry and subjected the defacto complainant to cruelty. Hence, this case.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners have never committed the offence as alleged by the prosecution; and that the

petitioners are ready to produce solvent sureties and to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and also undertakes to appear and to co-operate for the investigation, and sought for anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police while opposing for grant of bail to the petitioners, reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that the first petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant. The second petitioner is the mother-in-law of the defacto complainant. It is alleged that the petitioners demanded dowry from the defacto complainant and subjected her to cruelty. He also submitted that the petitioners have no previous cases and the investigation is still pending.

5.

Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegation against the petitioners, submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the fact that the petitioners have no

previous cases pending against them and since custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

6.

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 VI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- each (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, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] the petitioners and 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;

[b] the first petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10:30 A.M., until further orders; The second petitioner shall appear before the respondent Police as and when required for investigation, until further orders;

[c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during the investigation or during the trial;

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or during the trial;

[e] 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 petitioners were 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].

[f] If the petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 03.10.2025 klt

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 official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To 1.The learned VI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Kolathur K-5 Peravallur AWPS, Chennai.

(Crime No.326 of 2025) 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai - 104.

N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

klt 03.10.2025