Rithish @ Rithish Raj v. State By Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL.O.P.No.30604 of 2025 1.Rithish @ Rithish Raj 2.Rajendran 3.Kamaladevi 4.Aparna Raj ... Petitioners
Versus
The State rep by its, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Avadi, Thiruvallur District.
(Crime No.44 of 2025) .. Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.44 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioners :
Mr.S.Sasikumar For Respondent :
Mr.S.Udaya Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
O R D E R
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest by the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 85 of BNS, in Crime No.44 of 2025 seeks anticipatory bail.
1/5
2.The allegation against the petitioners is that the first petitioner is the husband, and the petitioners 2 to 4 are the in-laws of the defacto complainant. It is alleged that they demanded a sum of Rs.55 lakhs from the defacto complainant and also harassed her. Hence, the complaint. 3.The 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 it is a false complaint and due to difference of opinion, a complaint has been lodged against the petitioners. He further submitted that they are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the FIR was registered recently and that the investigation is still pending. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) and perused the materials available on record.
6. On perusal of the FIR, it is seen that the major allegation levelled against the first petitioner is that on 28.03.2025, he demanded a sum of 2/5
Rs.55 lakhs from the defacto complainant and when she did not come forward to comply with the same, the petitioners attacked and wrongfully confined her in the house. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, since custodial interrogation is not necessary for the case of this nature, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen Thousand Only), each 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 and on further condition that:
(a) 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 1st, 2nd and 3rd petitioners shall report before the respondent police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a 3/5
period of three weeks. The 4th petitioner shall report before the respondent police, as and when required for interrogation;
(c) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d) the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(e) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action 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 Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and;
(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
10.11.2025 drl To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee.
2. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Avadi, Thiruvallur District.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR, J.
4/5
drl CRL.O.P.No.30604 of 2025 10.11.2025 5/5