Syed Abuthair v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Awps-Uthamapalayam

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1.Syed Abuthair

2.Mumthaj Begam

3.Jasmin

4.JahirHussion ...Petitioners/A-2 to A5

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, AWPS-Uthamapalayam Theni district. (Crime No. 36 of 2023 ) ...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioners : Mr.B.Anandan

Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.K.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 36 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent pursuent to the Non-Bailable Warrant issued by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam, Theni in C.C.No.398 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 417 and 506(1) of IPC as against A2, A3 & A5 and Sections 498(A), 417, 323 and 506(1) of IPC as against A4, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that A1 and the defacto complainant are husband and wife and other accused are family members and the accused demanded dowry from the defacto complainant and threatened and attacked her. Due to non-appearance of the accused, Non-Bailable Warrant has been issued as against the petitioners on

23.03.2026. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He futher submits that already bail was granted to the petitioners and in the petition filed by the petitioner to quash the FIR, this Court ordered to dispense with the personal appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court. However, without considering the same, the Trial Court issued the Non-Bailable Warrant as against the petitioners. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly admits that already bail was granted to these petitioners and due to non-appearance, Non-Bailable Warrant was issued against the petitioners. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶5Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the rival submissions on either side and considering the fact that already bail was granted to the petitioners and due to absence, Non-Bailable Warrant was issued and the same is pending and as per the Orders of the Court, personal appearance of the petitioners was dispensed with, it is appropriate to direct the petitioners to appear before the Trial Court, where Non-Bailable Warrant is pending.

¶7Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to appear before the Trial Court within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and to file an application for cancellation of Non-Bailable Warrant. If such application is filed, the Trial Court is directed to consider the same on the same day in accordance with law, on merits.

¶8Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.

(P D B J)

30.03.2026 apd

To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam, Theni.

2.The Inspector of Police, AWPS-Uthamapalayam Theni district.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. CRLeOP(MD).eNo.e6279eofe2026 oooooP.oDHANABAL,oJ oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooapd oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooORDER oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooIN oooooooooooooooooooooooooCRLoOP(MD)oNo.o6279oofo2026 ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooDateoo:o30.03.2026