Geetha v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-06-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

1. Geetha Petitioner(s) Vs

1. State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Mohanur Police Station.

Namakkal District.

(Crime No.100 of 2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in the event of her arrest in Crime No.100 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.T. Dhasarathan For Respondent(s):

Mr.R.Vinotharaj Govt Advocate (crl Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS (Under Section 294(b), 323, 324, and 506(2) of IPC in Crime No.100 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to pre-existing enmity regarding the cutting of trees in the land of the defacto complainant, the petitioner along with other accused persons, allegedly abused the defacto complainant using filthy language, assaulted and threatened with dire consequences. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and she has been falsely implicated in this case and the co-accused who is arrayed as A1 and A2 in this case were arrested and released on bail in Crl.M.P.No.454 of 2025 on 21.05.2025. Hence, prayed for anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the case of the prosecution and on instructions submitted that the injured has been discharged from hospital and opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either sides, nature of the allegations, the co-accused were already granted bail and since, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required, 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 Judicial Magistrate-II, Namakkal 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 proof of payment of deposits, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;

[b] The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the Application for Suretyship [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;

[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police as and when required for interrogation; [d] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the defacto complainant and witnesses and shall not

tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police office as and when required; [f]the petitioner to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for Police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard; [g] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[h] 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];

[i] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

10-06-2025 Jai Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes:

To 1.State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Mohanur Police Station. Namakkal District. (Crime No.100 of 2025).

2. The Judicial Magistrate-II, Namakkal.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.

jai CRL OP No. 16447 of 10-06-2025