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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27-06-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR Rosema Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police Thiruthani Police Station, Thiruvallur District. Crime No.267 of 2025.

Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.267 of 2025 on the file of respondent. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.V Manimaran For Respondent(s):

M/s. R. Vinoth Raja Ga (crl.

Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 109 of the BNS (Under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 307 of IPC), on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner(s) along with the other persons, due to previous enmity had attacked the de facto complainant. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submitted that the petitioner is an innocent; that she has been falsely implicated in this case and she is ready to abide by the conditions putforth by this Court and hence, he prayed for anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police re-iterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that the injured was discharged from hospital and that there are no previous

cases as against the petitioner(s).

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made on either side and also nature of allegation, the injured was discharged from hospital, there are no previous case as against the petitioner, considering the age of the petitioner(s) and since custodial interrogation of the petitioner(s) are not required for investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner(s) subject to the following conditions:

(a) Accordingly, the petitioner(s) 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 of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Judicial Magistrate, Thirurttani 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 said Magistrate, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [b] the petitioner(s) shall report before the respondent police every day at 10:30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required; [c] the petitioner(s) shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner(s) shall not abscond 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 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]; [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

gbi 27-06-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police Thiruthani Police Station, Thiruvallur District. Crime No.267 of 2025.

2.The Judicial Magistrate, Thirurttani.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.

gbi CRL OP No. 17901 of 27-06-2025