George Edwin v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps-Thilagar Thidal
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06.03.2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE. K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN CRL.OP.(MD).No.4904 of 2026 1.George Edwin 2.Vijayakumari 3.Yesudhasan ... Petitioners Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Inspector of Police, AWPS - Thilagar Thidal, Madurai District.
(Crime No.6 of 2026) Now Investigated by the AWPS, Samayanallur.
... Respondent For Petitioners : Ms.Ragaventhree for Mr.K.Prabhu For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Criminal Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER in all cases :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 6 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.
ORDER: The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police 1/6
for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 109 of IPC, in Crime No. 6 of 2026, on the file of the AWPS Thilagar Thidal police Station and transferred to the AWPS, Samayanallur in Crime No.12 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that on 21.01.2019 the first accused entered into marriage with the defacto complainant. Subsequently, a male child was borne in the year 2020. Thereafter there was dispute arose between them. Hence, I.D.O.P.No.1418 of 2023 was filed by the husband and the same was not proceeded further and dismissed as withdrawn. Subsequently, another I.D.O.P.No.68 of 2025 was filed by the petitioner before the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Madurai. Thereafter the present case has been registered alleging that there is consistent demand of dowry and harassment made out against the defacto complainant.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and they are innocent persons. The IDOP filed by the petitioner was withdrawn at the request of the defacto complainant and her family members when there was undertaken to lead matrimonial home. But, she did not do so. Therefore, another IDOP has been 2/6
filed. Without proceeding the present IDOP, the complaint has been given by the defacto complainant. Hence, he seeks this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent on instructions opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners stating that there is offending material against the petitioner and their family members. Investigation is in primitive stage. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the earlier IDOP has been withdrawn by the petitioner and also subsequently, the pendency of present IDOP, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
6.Accordingly, this criminal original petition is allowed and the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Madurai, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order made ready and 3/6
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 first petitioner shall report before the respondent police namely Samayanallur Police Station, daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of fifteen days and thereafter, as and when required. The petitioners 2 and 3 shall report before the respondent police namely the Samayanallur Police station as and when required for interrogation.
[c]the petitioners shall not tamper with the 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 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].
4/6
[f]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.
06.03.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.V, Madurai.
2.The Inspector of Police, AWPS - Thilagar Thidal, Madurai District.
(Crime No.6 of 2026) 3.The Inspector of Police, AWPS, Samayanallur. (Crime NO.12 of 2026) 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J TM
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.4904 of 2026 Date : 06.03.2026 6/6