Ananthi v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10/07/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI Ananthi, W/o.Gnanasekar ... Petitioner/A2 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Cantonment, Trichy City.
(Crime No.9 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.T.Leninkumar, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.S.Prakash, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS 1/6
PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.9 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A2, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 316(1) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.9 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the the petitioner/A2 is the mother-in-law of the de-facto complainant. At the time of marriage between the 1st accused and the de-facto complainant, the de-facto complainant's parents gifted her 100 sovereigns of gold jewellery. As the 1st accused was working in Dubai, the de-facto complainant handed over her jewellery to the 1st accused and the petitioner to be kept in a bank locker before she left to Dubai. After six years, when she returned to India, she requested the 1st accused to return her jewellery. However, instead of doing so, the 1st accused and the petitioner allegedly abused the de-facto complainant using filthy language. Despite this, she tolerated the harassment, considering the welfare of her children. At this juncture, the de-facto complainant came to know that the 1st accused was having an affair with another woman. When she questioned him about it, the 1st accused allegedly abused her using filthy language and also threatened her 2/6
with dire consequences. Hence, the present case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the mother-in-law of the de-facto complainant and is a senior citizen. There was a matrimonial dispute between the 1st accused and the de-facto complainant. Due to the same, the de-facto complainant has lodged the present false complaint against the petitioner. He further submitted that the de-facto complainant has made a false averment against the petitioner that her parents had gifted her 100 sovereigns of gold jewellery, which was allegedly taken by the petitioner. He contended that she does not possess any material evidence to substantiate this allegation. He further submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He, however, submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the issue pertains to dowry harassment. He further submitted that 100 sovereigns of gold jewellery belonging to the de-facto complainant are still in the possession of the accused. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 3/6
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and taking note of the fact that the petitioner is merely the mother-in-law of the de-facto complainant, and also considering the limited overt act against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.
6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of her arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Additional Mahila Judge, 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 respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Mahila Judge, Trichy and on further conditions 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 her residential address and mobile number to 4/6
the learned Additional Mahila Judge, Trichy. In the event of any change in her residential address, the petitioner shall report the same to the learned Additional Mahila Judge, Trichy;
(c) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for the interrogation;
(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 herself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and; 5/6
(g) if the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.
sd/- 10/07/2025 / TRUE COPY / /08/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (CS-I/II/III/IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
mkn TO 1.The Additional Mahila Court, Trichy.
2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station,Cantonment, Trichy City. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1 CC to M/s.T.LENIN KUMAR, Advocate ( SR-7420[I] dated 11/07/2025 ) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.11721 of 2025 Date :10/07/2025 PR/31.07 .2025 6P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 6/6