Karuna Padmaraju v. The State Rep By

T.V.THAMIILSELVI, J., The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 494, 417, 355, 509, 506(ii) and 376(4) of IPC in Crime No.05 of 2019 , on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner continuously harassed the defacto complainant due to birth of girl child and also threatened her with dire consequences. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and she has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that divorce between A1 and the defacto complainant was granted on 14.09.2024 in Crl.O.P.No.141 of 2014. He also submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the

respondent would submit that there are totally 7 accused in this case and that the petitioner is arrayed as A4 who is the sister-in-law of A1. He further submitted that already absconding charge sheet was filed and NBW was also pending however, she is at present residing at Germany and now, the final report also filed. Hence he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the both counsel, and also considering the fact that already divorce was granted between A1 and the defacto complainant, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on

anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, 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 petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their 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 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 has been imposed and the petitioner is released on anticipatory 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]; and;

[f] if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC;

31.07.2024 ssi

T.V.THAMIILSELVI, J., ssi 31.07.2024