K.Renuka v. State Represented By, The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02-01-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP No. 32005 of 2024 1.K.Renuka 2.Uma Maheshwari.K 3.Karthik.K Petitioners Vs State represented by, The Inspector of Police, W-29, All Women Police Station, Avadi, Chennai - 600 071.
Crime No.21 of 2024.
Respondent For Petitioners:
Mr.N.Prateik For Respondent:
Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.21 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 376 and 506(1) of IPC, the present petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the main accused/A-1 had induced the defacto complainant on the false assurance of marrying her had
sexual intercourse with her, due to which, she became pregnant and when the defacto complainant informed the same to the mother, sister and brother-in-law of the 1st accused, they abused her in a filthy language and threatened to do away with her. Hence the case.
3. Pleading innocence on the part of the petitioners, false implication in the case, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks indulgence of this court. He would submit that the petitioners were issued with a notice under Section 41A of Cr.P.C and they also appeared for enquiry. He would further submit that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court.
4. The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for grant of anticipatory bail, is that, the main accused/A-1 had induced the defacto complainant on the false assurance of marrying her had sexually misbehaved with her, due to which, she became pregnant and when the defacto complainant informed the same to the petitioners/A-2 to A4, who are the mother, sister and brother-in-law, they abused her in a filthy language and threatened to do away
with her.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of his Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.
dsn [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioners 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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
02.01.2025 dsn