Rameshkumar v. State Rep. By Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 13.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Ramesh Kumar ... Petitioner Vs.

State Rep. By Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, SRMC, Porur Avadi, Tiruvallur District.

Crime No.14 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.14 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.E.Kannadasan For Respondent :

Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/6

O R D E R

The petitioner herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 294(b), 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in Crime No.14 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant and their marriage took place in the year 2013, after their marriage, while they were staying at Dubai, he had committed various offences including unnatural offences and thereafter he had returned back to India and stayed for some point of time. After they returned to India, they lived together and again on 19.08.2025, again the petitioner abused the defacto complainant. based on the complaint given earlier, enquiry was conducted by the respondent police and jewels were returned back, however various house hold articles were not returned and also she was also harassed. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that and the entire allegations were taken place at Dubai and subsequently they lived together happily and only in the year 2025, quarrel arose between the parties. 2/6

He further submitted that already the gold jewels were handed over. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that FIR has been registered recently. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels on either side and the allegations levelled in the FIR and the fact that the respondent police had already enquired and gold jewels were handed over to the defacto complainant, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions:

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the 3/6

event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Poonamallee, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition that:

[a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of ten 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 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 06.00.p.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions 4/6

have been imposed and the petitioner 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. 13.10.2025 sma To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Poonamallee.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, SRMC, Porur Avadi, Tiruvallur District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

sma 5/6

13.10.2025 6/6