Sumithra Sampath Kumar v. State Rep. By Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16-05-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR
1. Sumithra Sampath Kumar W/o.Sampath Kumar, GK Sundaram Street K K Pudur Coimbatore District.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. State Rep. by Inspector of Police, Saibaba Colony Police Station, Coimbatore. (Crime No.230/2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioner on Bail on event of their arrest in connection with Crime Number 230 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police For Petitioner(s):
Mr. S.Magesh Kumar For Respondent(s):
Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(3) of B.N.S and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act, 2002, in Crime No.230 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner's husband Sampathkumar (A1) had sent obscene photos to the de-facto complainant's wife and when it was questioned by the de-facto complainant, A1 abused the de-facto complainant and assaulted her.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and the case has been falsely foisted against him by the respondent for statistical purposes. He further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. Learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) submitted that the petitioner is wife of A1. A2 is the son of the petitioner. The primary allegation is only against A1, who said to have sent nude photographs to the de-facto complainant's wife and thereby caused annoyance; when it was questioned by the de-facto complainant, A1 abused and threatened the de-facto complainant's wife.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Having 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, 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 his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate - 7, Coimbatore District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a 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 and on further condition 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 appear before the respondent police as and when required for further interrogation;
[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 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 of B.N.S.
16-05-2025 ASI/UMA To
1. The Inspector of Police, Saibaba Colony Police Station, Coimbatore.
2. The Judicial Magistrate - 7, Coimbatore District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.
M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.
ASI/UMA 16-05-2025