Bhuvaneshwari v. State Rep. By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.03.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Bhuvaneshwari ... Petitioner Vs.
The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Maharajakadai Police Station, Krishnagiri District.
(Crime No.56 of 2025). ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in connection with the Crime No.56 of 2025, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.M.P.Saravanan For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 06.03.2025, seeking bail in Crime No.56 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 103 of BNS Act [ 302 of IPC].
1/6
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/A2 had an affair with the deceased; that thereafter she severed her relationship with him and got acquaintance with A1; that aggrieved over the same, the deceased had threatened the petitioner that he will upload her obscene photographs in the social media; that the petitioner informed the same to the A1; that A1 inturn went to the house of the deceased and caused the death of the deceased by setting fire by pouring petrol . Hence, the case.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the allegations are false; that the petitioner is a girl aged about 21 years and she is nothing to do with the alleged offence and in any case the petitioner is in custody from 06.03.2025; and that further custody is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.
4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) reiterated the prosecution case and confirmed the fact that the petitioner was not directly involved in the alleged incident and it is the A1, who committed the offence. 2/6
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the nature of allegations; the age of the petitioner; that the overt act is attributed only against A1 and the petitioner(A2) has no direct involvement in the offence; the period of incarceration; and since further custody is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing 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 Judicial Magistrate No.II, Krishnagiri and on further conditions 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further 3/6
orders;
[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[d] the petitioner 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 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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
20.03.2025 Sma 4/6
To
1. Judicial Magistrate No.II, Krishnagiri.
2.The Inspector of Police, Maharajakadai Police Station, Krishnagiri District.
3. The Superintendent, Central Prison(Women), Salem.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
5/6
SUNDER MOHAN., J.
Sma 20.03.2025 6/6