Rajeshwari v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.11.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Rajeshwari ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, V-4, Rajamangalam Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.523 of 2024).

... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in connection with the Crime No.523 of 2024, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Rajangam For Respondent :

Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.11.2024 seeking bail in Crime No.523 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 4(1)(a) r/w 4(1A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024. 1/7

2. The case of the prosecution is that based on the secret information, the respondent and his team conducted a search, where, they found that the accused was in illegal possession of 66 bottles (each 180ml) of TASMAC liquor for the purpose of selling the same in higher price. Hence the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, aged about 60 years, is an innocent person and she has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 03.11.2024 and she is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing for grant of bail to the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner was found to be in illegal possession of 66 bottles (each 180ml) of TASMAC liquor without any valid license. He further submitted that one previous case of similar nature is pending against the petitioner.

5. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that 2/7

the petitioner, without prejudice to her defence and contention, is ready and willing to deposit an amount of Rs.5,000/- as non-refundable deposit to any welfare scheme of the Government or any organization. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

7. On considering the voluntary submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- as non refundable deposit to "Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, Chennai", without prejudice to her rights and contentions before the trial Court.

8. Merely because the petitioner deposits the said amount, it would not amount to admission of her guilt. Therefore, it is open to the trial Court to deal with the case independently.

9. Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances of the 3/7

case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also considering the age of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

10. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to make a non-refundable deposit of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the credit of "Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, Chennai", without prejudice to her rights and contentions before the trial Court and on such deposit and production of proof, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, and on further conditions 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 report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during 4/7

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 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 B.N.S. 19.11.2024 ham To

1. The XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore.

2. The Inspector of Police, V-4, Rajamangalam Police Station, Chennai.

3. The Superintendent, Special Prison for Women, Puzhal, Chennai.

4. The Public Prosecutor, 5/7

High Court of Madras.

6/7

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA.,J.

ham 19.11.2024 7/7