Gokulkannan v. The State Rep by the Inspector of Police

O R D E R The petitioners who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 85, 115(2) and 296(b) of BNS, in Crime No.33 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner and the defacto complainant got married on 02.10.2023 and they were blessed with a male child. The petitioners have demanded dowry from the defacto complainant, assaulted her and abused in filthy language. Hence, the complaint.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and that they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that there is a matrimonial dispute between the first petitioner and the defacto complainant and no one sustained injuries. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶5Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances and the fact that the entire issue has erupted due to dowry harassment and that no one sustained injury, this Court is of the firm view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions.

¶6Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Harur, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each, with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The first and second 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; The third petitioner being a woman shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

20.07.2026 ssb To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Harur.

2.The Inspector of Police, AWPS-Harur Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J. ssb

20.07.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1.Gokulkannan 2.Moorthi 3.Thilagam ... Petitioners Vs. The State rep by its The Inspector of Police, AWPS-Harur Police Station, Dharmapuri District. (Crime No.33 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.33 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.J.Pradeep For Respondent : Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Crl.Side)