S. Sheik Mohamed v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps-Kulithalai
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved On :
16.03.2026 Pronounced On :
23.03.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN Crl.O.P(MD).No.4779 of 2026 and Crl.M.P.(MD).No.5983 of 2026 1.S.Sheik Mohamed 2.Abitha Begam 3.Syres Ali 4.Hajeera Shifa ... Petitioners Vs The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, AWPS, Kulithalai, Karur District.
(Cr.No.Not Known of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER:- This petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 to grant bail to the petitioners in the event of their arrest in crime No.Not Known of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. 1/8
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sundar for Mr.S.Kalidas For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For Intervenor : Mr.S.Ramsundarvijayraj
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b) and 307 of IPC, in Crime No.277 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The first petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant, and the remaining petitioners are her in-laws. The defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police stating that she and the first petitioner were in a relationship and subsequently entered into a registered marriage. After the marriage, it is alleged that the petitioners demanded additional dowry and subjected her to matrimonial cruelty. The complaint was forwarded to the Social Welfare Officer, Karur, and an enquiry is presently pending. In the meantime, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail. 2/8
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the marriage between the first petitioner and the defacto complainant was a love marriage. Due to objections raised by the defacto complainant's family, the first petitioner was allegedly attacked by her family members and their associates, resulting in grievous injuries, including the severance of his hand. In connection with the said incident, a case was registered under Section 307 IPC against the family members of the defacto complainant. It was further submitted that, in order to resolve the dispute, both parties agreed to marry. After the marriage, the first petitioner allegedly indulged in habits such as consumption of alcohol and smoking, which were objected to by the defacto complainant.
According to the petitioners, the present complaint has been lodged falsely with the assistance of the defacto complainant's relatives. The petitioners also produced materials, including photographs relating to the earlier incident and records showing dismissal of an earlier anticipatory bail petition. 4.Per contra, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant denied the allegations made by the petitioners and contended that the accusations regarding alcohol consumption, drug use, and smoking are false and fabricated. It was submitted that the first petitioner had misrepresented himself prior to the marriage and developed a relationship through online means.
marriage, the petitioners and their family members allegedly subjected the defacto complainant to continuous harassment and cruelty, thereby necessitating the present complaint.
This Court also called for a report from the Investigating Officer in the case registered at Tirunelveli concerning the alleged attack on the first petitioner. The Investigating Officer submitted that the said case had been closed, as the parties had decided to marry and the defacto complainant had expressed her inclination not to pursue the complaint. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that steps have been taken to challenge the closure report and that the same is pending. 5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, reiterating the submissions of the defacto complainant, submitted that there are specific allegations against the petitioners regarding dowry demand and matrimonial cruelty. 6.This Court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the defacto complainant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent and perused the materials available records.
4/8
7.Considering the registration of the case under Section 307 of the IPC against the family members of the de facto complainant for the their alleged attack upon 1st petitioner, and in view of the serious allegations made by the 1st petitioner against the de facto complainant that she, after marriage, allegedly indulged in habits such as consumption of alcohol and smoking, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the condition that they shall report before the respondent police for a period of 15 days, as directed.
8.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai, Karur District within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order made ready and on further conditions that: [a]the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity. [b]the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of fifteen days (15 days) and thereafter, as and when required. 5/8
[c]the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses 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 are 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].
[f]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.
23.03.2026 sbn To
1. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai, Karur District.
2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, AWPS, Kulithalai, Karur District.
3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, 6/8
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN.J, sbn Crl.O.P(MD).No.4779 of 2026 and Crl.M.P.(MD).No.5983 of 2026 23.03.2026 7/8
8/8