Pramila v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26-02-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN CRL OP NO. 5201 of 2025 Pramila Petitioner/A2 Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Ponneri Police Station, Tiruvallur District (Crime No. 48/2025) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):
Mr.R.Subramanian For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
O R D E R
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 329(4), 296(b) and 351(2) of BNS 2023 r/w Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act in Crime No.48 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
Page No.1 of 6
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner entered into the house of the defacto complainant; that he misbehaved with the defacto complainant; that when the said action was questioned by the defacto complainant's son, a quarrel arose between them. Hence, the case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations against the petitioner is false; that the petitioner is innocent; that the coaccused was already released on anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.OP.No.5068 of 2025 dated 25.02.2025; and that in any case custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of interrogation and hence, sought for grant of anticipatory bail.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and on instruction submitted that there is a counter case.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.
Page No.2 of 6
6. Considering the submissions made on either side; nature of allegations; that there is a counter case; co-accused was already released on bail; and since custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ponneri, on condition that each petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), 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 learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further conditions that: [a] the petitioner and 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. Page No.3 of 6
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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)AIR SCW 5560].
[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
26.02.2025 drl To
1. The Inspector Of Police, Page No.4 of 6
Ponneri Police Station, Tiruvallur District
2. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
drl Page No.5 of 6
26.02.2025 Page No.6 of 6