Punitha v. State Rep. By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.11.2025 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.32581 of 2025 Punitha ... Petitioner -vsState Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Unit, Police Station (Wing), Puducherry.
(Crime No.03 of 2023) ... Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.03 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police pending investigation.
For Petitioner :
Mr.John Sathyan, Senior Advocate for Mr.P.Divakar For Respondent :
Mr.M.V.Ramachandra Murthy, Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) ********** 1/7
ORDER
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 28.10.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420 of IPC r/w 34 of IPC, 13(1)(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act, in Crime No.03 of 2023, registered on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of prosecution is that on 08.09.2023 at 14.30 hours, the Officer on Special Duty, Directorate of Health and Family Welfare, Puducherry lodged a complaint against one S.Natarajan the Pharmacist, National Rural Health Mission, Puducherry and other officials of NRHM, Puducherry in which it is stated that during the year 2018-2019 M/s.Shri Padma Jothi Enterprises and M/s.Sriram Agency had supplied various medicines which were administered to the pregnant women by Primary Health Centres, Community Health Centres and Educational Institutions were found containing sediments and unsuitable for distribution and the medicines are substandard quality. During the procurement of the medicines the said S.Natarajan, Pharmacist and other officials of National Rural Health Missions, Puducherry has been involved in many minconducts of serious nature such as supply of substandard medicines supplied and 2/7
procurement of medicines from the agencies run by his wife and friends and caused huge revenue loss to the Government. It is further stated in the complaint that the said Natarajan and other officials of NRHM have misused their official capacity to commit the offence. Hence this case.
3. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that petitioner's husband who was arrayed as A1 was arrested and released on bail, this petitioner is also under incarceration from 28.10.2025 and in this case it is alleged that the petitioner herein is the benami of A1. He further submitted that the majority of the accused in this case already released on bail and the petitioner being a lady and prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that in this case A1 to A4 already arrested and released on bail and some of the accused released on anticipatory bail and he further submitted that the investigation is pending, that totally around Rs.48,00,000/- loss has been caused to the exchequer and opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.
5. Admittedly this petitioner is the wife of A1, and already A1 was 3/7
arrested and released on bail, similarly other accused who were ranked as A9 to A11 were granted bail by this in Crl.O.P.No.30992 of 2025, and in connected petitions, further the petitioner is being a lady and she is in incarceration, hence this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, for the exclusive trial under PC Act, Puducherry, and on further conditions that:- [a] 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity;
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10:30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when requires for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
4/7
[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the 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 B.N.S.
28.11.2025 rna Note:
1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.
2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be 5/7
watermarked and will also have a QR code.
To 1.The Special Judge, for the exclusive trial under PC Act, Puducherry. 2.The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Unit, Police Station (Wing), Puducherry.
3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puducherry.
4.The Public Prosecutor, Puducherry.
6/7
K. RAJASEKAR, J.
rna Crl.O.P.No.32581 of 2025 28.11.2025 7/7