Neelavathi v. State Rep By Its, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 14-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. Neelavathi D/o. Palanisamy, and 2 Others

2. Rathinammal W/o. Palanisamy,

3. Palanisamy S/o. Ayyamperumal, All are residing at, No.2/3-217, Aruvankadu, Thuttampatti post, Desavilakku, Salem District.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. State Rep by its, The Inspector of Police, Tharamangalam police Station, Salem District. (Crime No. 539/2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No. 539 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent.

For Petitioner(s):

Deepak Kumar C For Respondent(s):

Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Section 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 133, 351(3) of BNS and section 4 of TNPHW Act in Crime No.539 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners are in-laws of the 1 st accused who was arrested on the ground that A1 by joining with these petitioners have harassed the defacto complainant and also on the date of occurrence A1 attacked the victim with wood and these petitioners have also involved beating the victim with hands. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there was a quarrel and it is further developed into an attack between two groups and the petitioners have also been suffered injuries. He further submitted that A1 in this

case is arrested and victim has been discharged from the hospital. Therefore, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, reported that the petitioners are in-laws and they also participated in the occurrence and attack the defacto complainant as well as her father and victim has been discharged from the hospital. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Considering the fact that the victim has been discharged from the hospital and the major allegation in this case mainly against A1 and the fact that the petitioners are in-laws, 2 nd and 3 rd petitioners are being ladies, 1 st petitioner is aged person, I am 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 on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from

the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Omalur on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition:

(a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned 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 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; (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions 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 v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

14-10-2025 Mpa Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Omalur.

2.State Rep by its, The Inspector of Police, Tharamangalam police Station, Salem District. (Crime No. 539/2025) 3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

mpa CRL OP No. 27933 of 14-10-2025