G.Ramkumar v. The State Rep By, the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

05.06.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 80 and 85 of BNS Act, 2023 read with Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in Crime No.164 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is employed in a Tasmac shop. It is alleged that the petitioner demanded dowry from his wife and subjected her to cruelty. Consequently, she committed suicide by hanging herself. Hence the case. Page2 of 6

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been in custody since 05.06.2026. He further submitted that the marriage between the petitioner and his wife was solemnized on 01.07.2019. However, there was a continuous quarrels between them. He further submitted that the petitioner and his wife have a four year old daughter and even the in-laws have not taken care of the child. Unless the petitioner is enlarged on bail, it will be detrimental to the welfare of the minor child. He further contended that, according to the post-mortem report, there are no external injuries and the death occurred solely on account of suicide. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that about fifteen days prior to the death, the petitioner demanded an additional dowry of four sovereigns of gold, despite already having received twenty-three sovereigns from the family of the deceased. He further submitted that since this is a case of dowry harassment and the petitioner was remanded only on 05.06.2026, his further custody is required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, he prayed for the dismissal of the bail application.

¶5I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. Page3 of 6

6.On perusal of the postmortem report dated 06.06.2026, it is clear, as rightly contended by the petitioner's counsel, that there are no injuries to the muscles, bones or joints. However, there is a ligature mark on both sides of the neck. Beyond that, no external injuries were found on the body as per the postmortem report. In such view of the circumstances, although an unfortunate incident took place on 05.06.2026, taking into consideration the welfare of the four year old minor daughter of the petitioner and the fact that the petitioner has been incarcerated since 05.06.2026, this Court is of the firm view that his further custody is not necessary for the purpose of investigation. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶7Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam, and subject to the following conditions: [a] 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m until further orders; Page4 of 6 [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] on breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions had been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283]; [f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 14-07-2026 ep Note:

¶1Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

¶2All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code. Page5 of 6 To

1.The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam.

2.The Superintendent of Prison, Nagapattinam Prison.

3.The Inspector of Police Velipalayam Police Station, Nagapattinam.

4.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o18391oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. EP CRLoOPoNo.o18391oofo2026 14-07-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 14-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN G.Ramkumar ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Velipalayam Police Station, Nagapattinam. (Crime No.164 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.164 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of respondent police For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Karthikeyan For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar, Government Advocate (Criminal Side )