Amruth Shogul v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Awps-Fort

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Amruth Shogul, S/o.Ramesh

...Petitioner/A1

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Fort All Women Police Station, Trichy City.

(Crime No.8 of 2026)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Leninkumar, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For Intervenor : Ms.S.Vasuki, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER : For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.8 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

1/6

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A1, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 85 of BNS, 2023, read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, in Crime No.8 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant married the petitioner on 08.06.2025. At the time of marriage, the defacto complainant's parents presented 35 sovereigns of gold jewellery to her and 5 sovereigns to the petitioner. Despite the same, the petitioner's parents demanded further dowry, and the petitioner and his parents subjected her to harassment demanding dowry. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case, and that he is in no way connected with the aforesaid incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/6

4. The learned counsel for the intervenor would submit that the petitioner, who is the husband of the de-facto complainant, along with his parents, subjected the de-facto complainant to mental and physical cruelty by demanding additional dowry. Hence, she opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that the issue pertains to a matrimonial dispute and that there are no previous cases registered against the petitioner. However, he opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

7. Considering the rival submissions made on either side and the nature of the offences charged against the petitioner, and further considering the fact that the issue pertains to a matrimonial dispute, and also considering that there are no previous cases registered against the 3/6

petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is 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, Trichy, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police once in a week i.e. on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

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

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

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take 4/6

appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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.

(P D B J) 30.04.2026 (2/2) mkn To 1.The Additional Mahila Court, Trichy.

2.The Inspector of Police, Fort All Women Police Station, Trichy City.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

mkn

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 7572 of 2026 Date : 30.04.2026 (2/2) 6/6