Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/6428/2026granted

Aravinth v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

2026-04-01Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 01/04/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. Aravinth @ Aravind

2. Chinnakani

3. Radha ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 3 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep By, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

Cr.No.11 of 2026.

... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.11 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.P.T.Ramesh Raja for MR.Vinodh R, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 316 and 296(b) of BNSS (Corresponding Section 498(A), 406, 294(b) of IPC) and Section 4 & 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, in Crime No.11 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner is the husband and the petitioners 2 & 3 are the in-laws of the complainant. Though the sufficient sridhana was given to the complainant at the time of marriage, from the date of marriage, the petitioners harassed the complainant by demanding additional dowry. Hence, a case has been registered against the accused for the aforesaid offences. Hence, this petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that it is a matrimonial dispute between the first petitioner and the complainant. Even though, the complainant initiated divorce and 2/6

violence proceedings as against the first petitioner, the first petitioner filed HMOP.No.548 of 2025 before the Family Court, Nagercoil seeking restitution of conjugal rights and no previous case is pending against the petitioner. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that it is a matrimonial dispute. The petitioners harassed the complainant by demanding additional dowry. Hence, the complainant initiated the divorce and violence proceedings as against the first petitioner. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. However, he fairly conceded that the petitioners have no previous case.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners, and the relationship between the first petitioner and the complainant and it is a matrimonial dispute between the first petitioner and the complainant and the petitioner filed a petition in HMOP.No.548 of 2025 seeking restitution of conjugal right 3/6

and the same is pending and no previous case is pending against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to 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 Additional Mahila Court, Nagercoil, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.

[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. 4/6

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

01.04.2026 dss To 1.The Additional Mahila Court, Nagercoil.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Kanyakumari District, 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

P. DHANABAL,J dss 5/6

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.6428 of 2026 Date : 01/04/2026 6/6