Ruby Victoria v. The State Rep By Its,

K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J., The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under sections 294(b), 323, 427, 448, 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act, in Crime No.98 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on account of previous enmity between the petitioner and the defaco complainant, who are relatives, regarding property dispute and running of church in the said property, the petitioner along with other accused tresspassed into the house of the defacto complainant, assaulted him and also abused him in a filthy language. Hence the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and the complaint has been given as a counter blast. He also submitted that already a civil suit is pending between the petitioner and the defacto complainant and she is ready to abide by any

stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Thee learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police submitted that on account of property dispute between both sides, the petitioner along with other accused, trespassed in to the house of the defacto complainant and attacked him. He further submitted that a civil suit is also pending between both sides.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also considering the fact that the dispute is between relatives and already a civil suit is pending between both sides, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned XVII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five 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 learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition 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 his Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during

K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J., msr/tk investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner is released on bail by the learned Magistrate 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 229A IPC.

10.05.2023 msr/tk