Baskarani v. The State Rep.By, Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Baskarani D/o.Dheivanathan ... Petitioner / A2 Vs.

The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Mayiladuthurai.

Crime No.2 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. / 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest or surrender in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.N.Sunil Kumar For Respondent :

Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 7(b) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1998 of IPC in Crime No.2 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner herein is the 1/5

Village Assistant in the VAO Office Memathur Village and on the instructions of the VAO, she went to the complainant's house and demanded a sum of Rs.5,000/- since they had arranged for the compensation for the loss of the cow for the father of the complainant. Hence, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police. Thereafter, based on the complaint, a trap was held and at the time of handing over the amount of Rs.3,000/- to the VAO, he was caught red handed. The phenolphthalein test was conducted and it was concluded positive. Hence, VAO (A1) was arrested, however, the petitioner was not present in the place of occurrence of the incident and hence was not arrested.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the averments made in the FIR shows that only on the instructions of the A1, the petitioner has demanded money from the complainant and she had not demanded anything and that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, hence sought for anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police while opposing the anticipatory bail to the petitioner 2/5

reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that as per the complaint, the petitioner and the first accused involved in the corruption activity and that the investigation of this case is pending.

5.

Considering the submissions made, facts and circumstances of this case, nature of allegation, the fact that the first accused is still in custody and the petitioner had went to complainant house only on the instructions of the first accused; and the fact that the occurrence has taken place as early as 16.02.2025; there is no previous case as against the petitioner herein, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

6.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned District and Session Judge/Special Judge, Mayiladuthurai, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

3/5

[a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30.a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; [d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

08.01.2026 ssa 4/5

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

ssa To 1.The learned District and Session Judge/ Special Judge, Mayiladuthurai.

2.The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Mayiladuthurai.

Crime No.2 of 2025 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

08.01.2026 5/5