Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2359 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 15.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 2359 of 2026 M.Ashok ... Petitioner Vs 1.State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Vallam, Thanjavur District. (Crime No.16 of 2025) 2.A.Gayathri ...Respondents/Complainants (R2 has been impleaded as per order of this Court dated 06.02.2026) For Petitioner : Mr.K.S.Kathiravan Advocate. For Respondents : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy for R1 Government Advocate (Crl. side) Mr.R.Maheswaran for R2 Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 16 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2359 of 2026 The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 294(b), 498(A), 323, 406 of IPC r/w Section 4 of TNPWH Act, in Crime No.16 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that marriage was solemnized between the petitioner and the defacto complainant on 06.04.2022. Thereafter the petitioner along with other in-laws harassed the defacto complainant by 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 parties. 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. There is matrimonial dispute between the parties. The petitioner along with his family members harassed the defacto complainant by demanding more dowry. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2359 of 2026 the petitioner. The petitioner has no previous case. 5.The learned counsel for the defacto complainant submitted that now the jewels are with the petitioner and he did not return the same till now. He pledged the jewels with the Bankers. One two wheeler is also with them. Demanding more dowry he abused the defacto complainant in filthy language. The petitioner's parents also abused the defacto complainant and attacked her. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.The learned counsel for the petitioner in reply has stated that the petitioner is ready to return back the 9 ½ sovereigns of gold jewels. He also ready to return the two wheeler. Earlier, the defacto complainant also agreed to receive the same. He seeks time to return the above said agreed jewels. 7. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 8. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, considering the relationship between the parties, there is a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant and the petitioner also expressed that he is ready to hand over the 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2359 of 2026 two wheeler and as far as jewels are concerned, they have been pledged with some other Bankers, thereby, seeks time to redeem the jewels and in view of the above said undertaking given by the petitioner and no previous case against the petitioner, 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, Thanjavur, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall return the two wheeler to the defacto complainant as agreed by him within a period of three months from the date of release out of anticipatory bail and he shall return the agreed quantum of jewels namely 9 ½ sovereigns of gold jewels, immediately after release out of the anticipatory bail and [c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, at 10.30 a.m., on every Saturday for a period of four weeks, thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; [d] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2359 of 2026 nature. [e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [f] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [g] 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]. [h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S. (P D B J) 15.04.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Thanjavur. 2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Vallam, Thanjavur District.(Crime No.16 of 2025) 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2359 of 2026 P. DHANABAL, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 2359 of 2026 Date : 15.04.2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis