Naveen Kumar v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps-Colachel

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 16.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 23157 of 2025 Naveen Kumar ... Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, AWPS Colachel Police Station, Kanniyakumari District.

(Crime No.29 of 2025)

...Respondents/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.P.T.Ramesh Raja Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For Intervenor : Mr.T.Huberston PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 29 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406, 294(b), 323 and 506(i) of 1/6

IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in Crime No.29 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner's son and the defacto complainant are husband and wife. The petitioner's son along with in-laws harassed the defacto complainant demanding more dowry. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. There is matrimonial dispute between the petitioner's son and the defacto complainant. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the offences are grave in nature. The petitioner along with his family members demanding more dowry and half share of the property of the defacto complainant's father's family. They harassed the defacto complainant both physically and mentally. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Investigation is still pending.

2/6

5. The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that the petitioner's family demanded 40 sovereigns of gold jewels and also physically harassed the defacto complainant. Hence, opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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, considering the relationship between the parties, there is matrimonial dispute between the parties, the petitioner has no previous case and also considering all other facts and circumstances of the case, I am 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 learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, at 3/6

10.30 a.m., on every Saturday for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; [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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

(P D B J) 16.04.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel.

4/6

2.The Inspector of Police, AWPS Colachel Police Station, Kanniyakumari District.

(Crime No.29 of 2025) 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 23157 of 2025 Date : 16.04.2026 6/6