Lakshmi v. The State Rep By, Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.04.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN 1.Lakshmi 2.Muniyammal
...Petitioners/Accused 1 & 2
Vs.
State rep by The Inspector of Police, Polur Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.
(Crime No.106 of 2025) ...
Respondent PRAYER: This criminal original petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime No.106 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners :
Mr.S.B.Viswanathan For Respondent :
Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Page No.1 of 6
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.04.2025, seeking bail in Crime No.106 of 2025 registered for the offence under Section 131 of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 75 of JJ Act, 2015.
2.It is the case of the prosecution that the first petitioner was working as Cook and the second petitioners was working as Assistant in Sengunam Panchayat Union Primary School; that on 02.04.2025 at about 12.45 p.m., during lunch break, when the victim boy, who is studying 5th standard in the same school, asked for egg, the petitioners had assaulted the victim with broom stick and stones. Hence, the case.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent; that they have been suspended from service; that the petitioners have no bad antecedents and that the petitioners are in custody from 05.04.2025 and hence, further custody of the petitioners is not required and sought for bail.
Page No.2 of 6
4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and confirmed the fact that the petitioners were suspended from service and that the petitioners have no bad antecedents. 5.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6.Considering the nature of allegations, period of incarceration, the fact that the petitioners have no bad antecedents, the petitioners were suspended from service and since further custody of the petitioners is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
7.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing separate bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Polur, Thiruvannamalai, and on further conditions that:
Page No.3 of 6
[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., until further orders; [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 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 B.N.S.
23.04.2025 ata Page No.4 of 6
Copy to:
1.The Inspector of Police, Polur Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.
2.The Judicial Magistrate Court, Polur, Thiruvannamalai. 3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Vellore.
4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
Page No.5 of 6
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
ata 23.04.2025 Page No.6 of 6