Praveenkumar v. State Rep By Its
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04-11-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
1. Praveenkumar S/o.Elumalai, 2/198, South Street, Melkavarpattu, Cuddalore - 607 112.
2. Elumalai S/o.Poraiyuran, 2/198, South Street, Melkavarpattu, Cuddalore - 607 112.
3. Jamuna W/o.Elumalai, 2/198, South Street, Melkavarpattu, Cuddalore - 607 112.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. State rep by its Inspector of Police, AWPS-Cuddalore Police Station, Cuddalore District.
Crime No.64 of 2025 Respondent(s)
PRAYER To enlarge the petitioners on Anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime.No.64 of 2025 on the file of Inspector of Police, AWPS-Cuddalore Police Station, Cuddalore District/Respondent Police and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):
R.Karthikeyan For Respondent(s):
Mr.S.udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 85, 296(b) and 351(2) of BNS and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in Crime No.64 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.
2. The allegation against the petitioners is that first petitioner is the husband of the de facto complainant and other petitioners are in-laws. Earlier first petitioner and victim girl were having relationship for a longer period and first petitioner subsequently refused to marry her, which resulted in the de facto complainant approaching all the petitioners herein and demanding arrangement of marriage, and accordingly the marriage was also held on 14.8.2025. Subsequently, they have started harassing the victim and also criminally intimidated her. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the marriage was held in the month of August 2025, immediately there was difference of opinion, hence matrimonial proceedings were also initiated by the first petitioner. Hence, de facto complainant lodged this complaint. He further submitted that he is ready to cooperate with the investigation. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate(crl.side) appearing for the respondent police reported that investigation in this case is pending and the FIR was only registered recently. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Considering the nature of the allegation and the fact that already matrimonial proceedings were initiated and the allegation, though stated against A1 that he has not come forward to marry the victim immediately after they developing relationship, the marriage subsequently took place, and there are differences of opinion between them, 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 (15) days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Additional Mahila Court, Cuddalore, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition: (a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) 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 identify proofs to ensure their identity;
(c) The petitioners shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;
(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed 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 v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];
(e) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.
04-11-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes mpa To 1.The Additional Mahila Court, Cuddalore.
2.State rep by its Inspector of Police, AWPS-Cuddalore Police Station, Cuddalore District.
Crime No.64 of 2025 3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR J.
mpa CRL OP No. 29886 of 04-11-2025