Jagatjit Subbaraman v. The State Rep.By, the Inspector of Police,

O R D E R The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 323 of BNSS, 2023 and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, in Crime No.44 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the husband of the de facto complainant. It is alleged that the petitioner, along with the other accused, demanded 300 sovereigns of gold and a BMW car as dowry. Since the demand was not met by the de facto complainant's family members, the petitioner, along with his parents, started harassing her and also caused her injuries. Unable to bear the same, the de facto complainant consumed Dettol and underwent treatment. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent, has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution, and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the co-accused have already been released on anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.28646 of 2025 dated 22.10.2025. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned counsel appearing for the intervener submitted that the de facto complainant sustained severe injuries and her jaw was also broken. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶5The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed the anticipatory bail application and submitted that proceedings are pending before the Family Court for divorce, and a domestic violence case has also been filed.

¶6Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, including the fact that there is a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the de facto complainant and that the occurrence took place on 11.09.2025 and that the co-accused have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail, this Court is of the firm view that, at this length of time, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions:

¶7Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week, and thereafter 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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 petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

09.07.2026 cda To

1.The Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station - Central, Coimbatore City.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J. cda

09.07.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 09.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Mr.Jagatjit Subbaraman ... Petitioner Vs. The State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station - Central, Coimbatore City. (Crime No.44 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.44 of 2025 on the file of respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Arikarasudan For Intervenor : Mr.R.Vinayaga Vishnu For Respondent : Mr.N.Palanivel, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)