Ahamed Risam 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 Crl.O.P.No.27819 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.19042 of 2025

1. Ahamed Risam

2. Rahamathulla

3. Fathima Raihana ... Petitioners Vs.

State rep. By the Inspector of Police, AWPS Central Coimbatore, Coimbatore City, Coimbatore.

Crime No.46 of 2025.

... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.46 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners :

Mr.Mohana Sundaram For Intervenor : Mr.R.Thirumoorthy for Mr.A.Thiyagarajan For Respondent :

Mr.S.Udayakumar, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

O R D E R

The petitioners herein apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406, 323, 506(i) of IPC, 296(b) of BNS and Section 4 of TNPHW Act in Crime No.46 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail. 1/4

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant married the first petitioner on 17.01.2021, as arranged by the elders of both families and at the time of marriage, gold jewellery and a car were given to her as gifts from her parents. After the marriage, she was subjected to harassment at the hands of the petitioners, and she left her matrimonial home in the year 2024. Her jewellery was not returned to her. Further she was abused in filthy language and threatened by the petitioners. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case and they are ready to abide any stringent conditions and co-operate with the enquiry. Hence, he prayed to grant of bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned counsel for the Intervenor would submit that the petitioners had caused injuries to the victim as well as her female child and also demanded dowry. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the earlier, the petitioners approached this Court during the petition enquiry stage, and this Court directed them to appear before the respondent police for the purpose of investigation. However, they failed to appear before the respondent police, and therefore, the investigation is still 2/4

pending. Hence, he strongly opposed for grant bail to the petitioners.

6. Considering the fact that it is not merely a case of dowry harassment, but also involves physical assault on the victim and her child, and further noting that the petitioners have not cooperated with the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 13.10.2025 kmm To

1. The Inspector of Police, AWPS Central Coimbatore, Coimbatore City, Coimbatore.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR.J., 3/4

kmm Crl.O.P.No.27819 of 2025 13.10.12025 4/4