Mathi S v. State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By Its Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.Nos. 31698 & 31699 of 2025 1.Mathi
...Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No. 31698/2025
2.Kasthuri
...Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No. 31699/2025
Versus
The State Rep by Inspector of Police, K2, Ayyanavaram Police Station Crime No. 27 of 2025.
...Respondent
[in both petitions] Common Prayer: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in Crime No. 27 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, pending investigation.
For Petitioners :
Mr.Maheswaran For Mr. M. Naveen For Respondent :
Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/8
COMMON
O R D E R
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 194(3)(i) of BNS, 2023 altered under Sections 80, 85 r/w 3(5) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No. 27 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2.The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.31699 of 2025, is the mother-in-law of the deceased ranked as A2 and the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.31698 of 2025 is the relative of the husband of the deceased ranked as A3. The marriage between the deceased and the first accused/husband was taken place on 07.06.2024 and since the petitioners joined together had harassed the deceased continuously and also demanded dowry, she was unable to bear the same and she committed suicide by hanging. Hence the complaint was lodged before the respondent police and the case was initially registered for the offences under Sections 194(3) (i) of BNS, 2023 and subsequently, after completion of Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) enquiry, the offences were altered under Sections 80, 85 r/w 3(5) of 2/8
BNS, 2023 in Crime No. 27 of 2025.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners had not involved any harassment of the deceased and the majority of the allegations are leveled against the first accused. He further submitted that the first accused had already arrested and remanded to judicial custody. An FIR was registered in the month of January, 2025. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and sought for anticipatory bail to the petitioners and they are ready to co-operate for investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and reported that the Revenue Division Officer [RDO] enquiry revealed that it is a case of dowry death and he has also produced a copy of the report before this Court. He further 3/8
submitted that the enquiry was completed. He further submitted that the first accused had already arrested and remanded to judicial custody. 5.I have also gone through the FIR as well as the report of the Revenue Divisional Officer, it reveals that the majority of the allegations are leveled against the first accused, namely, Mr.Arunkumar, who is the husband of the deceased. In the report, Mr.Arunkumar, had elaborately stated that not only abused the deceased in public place and also attacked her.
6. Considering report of the Revenue Divisional Officer and other facts and circumstances of the case; that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary; that the majority of the allegations are leveled against the husband of the deceased; this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the 4/8
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 Judicial Magistrate, Egmore, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a 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 that:
(a) If the petitioners fail to surrender before the concerned Magistrate, within a period of fifteen 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; 5/8
[c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police daily 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 aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court themselves 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. 03.11.2025 MSM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Egmore.
6/8
2.The Inspector of Police, K2, Ayyanavaram Police Station Crime No. 27 of 2025.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
MSM Crl.O.P.Nos. 31698 & 31699 of 2025 7/8
24.11.2025 8/8