Seedhalakshmi v. The State Rep By Its The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.4592 of 2026

1. Seedhalakshmi

2. Ravi

3. Kannammal @Annammal

4. Ayyavu ... Petitioners Vs.

The State Rep by its:

The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thirukoilur, Kallakurichi District.

... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Cr.No.128 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Raji For Respondent : Ms. J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 69, 89, 296(b), 115(2) of BNS, 2023 in Cr.No.128 of 2025 , on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail. 1/5

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners herein are the relatives of A1, and he had promised to marry her and had physical relationship with her. Subsequently, she became pregnant. Hence, the victim lady insisted A1 to marry her, but A1 joining hands with the petitioners herein and threatened her with dire consequence, which lead to the registration of an FIR. Hence, the present petition has been filed by the petitioners for seeking anticipatory bail.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners herein are sister, brother and parents of A1 and they are ranked as A 2, A3, A5 and A6 and they have not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that no previous cases reported against the petitioners, and investigation in this case is pending . Hence, he vehemently opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 2/5

6. Considering the fact that the petitioners herein are close relatives of the main accused/A1 and the majority of the allegations are against him and the allegations against the petitioners is that they have only threatened the defacto complainant. Though investigation in this case is pending and no previous cases reported against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

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 made, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thirukoilur on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute separate bonds for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition that: (a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a 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 identify proofs to ensure their identity; 3/5

(c) The petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; (e)If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

25.02.2026 Vv To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Thirukoilur 2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thirukoilur, Kallakurichi District 3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.

4/5

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

Vv Crl.O.P.No.4592 of 2026 25.02.2026 5/5