Devi v. The State Rep By, The Sub-Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 31.01.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDAR MOHAN Crl.O.P.No.2238 of 2025 1.Devi 2.Pugazhendhi 3.Bhuvaneswari ... Petitioners/A1 to A3 Vs.

The State Rep. by Sub-Inspector of Police, Vettavalam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

(Crime No.6 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.6 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner :

Ms.Ilayarani Ponraj For Respondent :

Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/6

O R D E R

The petitioners / A1 to A3, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 118 and 351(3) of BNSS in Crime No.6 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the 1st petitioner is the wife of the defacto complainant and the 2nd and 3rd petitioners are the children of the defacto complainant. There was a wordy quarrel between the 1st petitioner and the defacto complainant with respect to matrimonial dispute, which quarrel escalated into violence. As a result, the petitioners attacked the defacto complainant with deadly weapon and abused him in a filthy language. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that there is a counter complaint given by the petitioners against the defacto complainant, which has been registered as Crime No.5 of 2025. He would further submit that the petitioners are the law abiding citizen and ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. 2/6

Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioners. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent would submit that there was a wordy quarrel between the 1st petitioner and the defacto complainant with respect to matrimonial dispute, which quarrel escalated into violence. As a result, the petitioners attacked the defacto complainant with deadly weapon and abused him in a filthy language. He would further submit that there are no previous cases pending as against the petitioners and the injured had been discharged from the hospital.

5. Heard both side learned counsel and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the nature of allegation; the fact that the injured had been discharged from the hospital and there is a case and counter and since custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

3/6

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on 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 was made ready, before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kilpennathur, Thiruvannamalai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), each with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the said Magistrate, on further condition that: [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the 4/6

conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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)AIR SCW 5560];

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

31.01.2025 smv To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kilpennathur, Thiruvannamalai. 2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Vettavalam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

smv Crl.O.P.No.2238 of 2025 31.01.2025 6/6