R Rajesh v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 05/08/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI R.Rajesh, S/o.Ramani ... Petitioner/A1 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by, the Inspector of Police, Paramakudi All Women Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
(Crime No.5 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.C.Gangai Amaran, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.S.Prakash, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.5 of 2025 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 police for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 127(2) and 115(2) of BNS, 2023 r/w. Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act in Crime No.5 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the 1st accused married the de-facto complainant on 07.07.2024. At the time of marriage, 15 sovereigns of gold jewels and sridhana articles worth about Rs.3 lakhs were given by the parents of the de-facto complainant as dowry. Even after the marriage, the 2nd and 4th accused demanded further dowry, i.e., 35 sovereigns of gold jewels and a two-wheeler, and subjected her to harassment. Owing to such harassment, the de-facto complainant attempted to commit suicide, and was admitted to the hospital, and upon recovery, she went to her parents' house. Subsequently, on 13.04.2025, while the de-facto complainant and her father had gone to attend the post-ritual ceremony of her grandfather, the accused came and assaulted her. Hence, the present case was registered.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that 2/6
A2 and A4 have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Vacation Sessions Judge, Ramanathapuram on 15.05.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.93 of 2025. He, however, submitted that the petitioner is willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail for the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) submits that there are totally four accused persons in this case and the petitioner has been arrayed as A1. A2 and A4 have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Vacation Sessions Judge, Ramanathapuram on 15.05.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.93 of 2025. He submitted that the defacto complainant has not sustained any injuries due to the incident. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence, and taking note of the fact that the date of occurrence is 13.04.2025, but the FIR was registered only on 05.05.2025, and that two of the coaccused have been granted anticipatory bail, and that the de-facto complainant has not sustained any injuries due to the incident, and that by this time most of the investigation might have been completed, and that as the issue pertains to a matrimonial dispute, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary in this case, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.
3/6
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Mahila Court, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District, on condition that the petitioner 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Mahila Court, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: (a) the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; (b) the petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile number to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Mahila Court, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.
(c) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;
4/6
(d) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(e) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; (f) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take 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] and; (g) if the accused/petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.
sd/- 05/08/2025 / TRUE COPY / /2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
mkn TO 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Mahila Court, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Paramakudi All Women Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
5/6
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1 CC to M/s.C.GANGAI AMARAN, Advocate ( SR-8455[I] dated 06/08/2025 )
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.9562 of 2025 Date :05/08/2025 HPS/03.09.2025 6P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 6/6