Pachayammal v. State Rep By Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11-06-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN Pachayammal No.95, Bajanai Kovil Street, Rangavaram, Banavaram, Ranipet District ..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep by Inspector of Police Banavaram Police Station, Banavaram, Ranipet District.
Crime No.137 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of her arrest in crime No.137 of 2026 on the file of the Banavaram Police Station, Banavaram, Ranipet District.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. M.Vignesh Babu For Respondent(s):
MR.N.PALANIVEL, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 127(2), 351(2) of BNS @ 296(b), 115(2), 127(2), 351(2) of BNS and 75 Juvenile Justice Act, in Crime No.137 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, being the mother-in-law of the defacto complainant, due to matrimonial dispute between the defacto complainant and the first accused, engaged in a wordy quarrel arose with the defacto complainant, during which the petitioner assaulted the defacto complainant and took the child inside the room and locked themselves therein. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner, being the mother-in-law of the defacto complainant, has been roped in due to matrimonial dispute between the spouses and that no specific overt act is attributed against the petitioner. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that the petitioner actively participated in the occurrence and assaulted the defacto complainant. He further submitted that the petitioner has no previous case pending against him. However, she opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records available.
6. Considering the nature of the allegations and the fact that the entire issue appears to have arisen out of a matrimonial dispute, this Court is of the firm view that, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, subject to 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 on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Sholinghur, 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 learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:
(a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;
(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (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 daily at 10.30 am for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];
(e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.
11-06-2026 GBI To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Court, Sholinghur.
2.The Inspector of Police Banavaram Police Station, Banavaram, Ranipet District.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
GBI 11-06-2026