Ameena Basha v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 15.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Ameen Basha
...Petitioner/Accused No.1
Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, AWPS Cantonment Police Station, Trichy District.
(Crime No.3 of 2026) ..Respondent For Petitioners :Mr.Yasar Arafath For Respondent :Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) For Intervener :Ms.J.Kavinaya PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.3 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.
1/8
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused No.1, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 294(b) and 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.3 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the wife of the petitioner. The marriage was solemnized on 29.01.2023, at that time, the parents of the defacto complainant have given sreedhana articles. Thereafter, the petitioner and his family members demanded dowry from the defacto complainant and harassed her and tortured her by mentally. Hence, the case.
2/8
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the intervenor represented the defacto complainant and would submit that the defacto complainant is going to file intervene petition. He also objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner repeatedly harassed the defacto complainant and the offences are grave in nature. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. The learned Counsel for State of TN (Crl.
Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the investigation is pending and the 3/8
offences are grave in nature and no one sustained any injuries and the petitioner has no previous cases. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
7. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner and there was a matrimonial dispute between the parties and no previous case is pending against the petitioner and also considering the fact that no one sustained any injuries and most of the investigation might have been completed and hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is 4/8
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 Additional Mahila Court, Trichy, 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 learned Judicial Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police once in a week ie., on Every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.
5/8
[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 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].
6/8
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
(P D B J) 15.06.2026 vsg To 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate Additional Mahila Court, Trichy.
2.The Inspector of Police, AWPS Cantonment Police Station, Trichy District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
7/8
P. DHANABAL, J., vsg
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 11088 of 2026 Date : 15.06.2026 8/8