← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/22702/2025granted

A Prashanth Raj Samuel v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps-Ramanathapuram

2026-01-06Honourable Mrs Justice S.Srimathy6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06.01.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY 1.A.Prashanth Raj Samuel

2. Rameswari ... Petitioners/Accused Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.By, the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

(Crime No.25 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant (Amended as per the order of this Court dated 06.01.2026 in Crl.MP(MD).No.205 of 2026 in Crl.OP(MD).No.22702 of 2025) For Petitioners : Mr.D.Balamurugapandi Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.25 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

1/6

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(2) , 85 of BNS (under Sections 294(b), 323, 506(i), 498A of IPC ) and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in Crime No.25 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the 1st petitioner is the husband and 2nd petitioner is the mother-in-law of the defacto complainant. Further, the petitioners had demanded additional dowry from the defacto complainant and also threatened her. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the 1st petitioner is the husband and the 2nd petitioner is the mother-in-law of the defacto complainant, due to family dispute, a false case has been given. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to abide by 2/6

any conditions which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that there are no previous case pending against the petitioners and the investigation is almost completed. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that there was a family dispute and there are no previous case pending against the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions. 6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, on condition that each of 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 Additional Mahila Court, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District, within a period of fifteen days from the date 3/6

on which, the order copy was made ready and on further conditions that: [a]the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioners 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 interrogation;

[c]the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d]the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 are released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the 4/6

Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

[f]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

(S S Y J) 06.01.2026 msrm To 1.The learned Additional Mahila Court, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

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

5/6

S.SRIMATHY,J msrm

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.22702 of 2025 06.01.2026 (1/2) 6/6