Mary Pushpam v. He State Of Tamil Nadu Through The, Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Mary Pushpam ... Petitioner Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu, through the, Inspector of Police, Kannankuruchi Police Station, Salem City.

Crime No.333 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.333 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.Vengadesh Durai Raja V K For Respondent :

M/s.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 75 Juvenile Justice ( Care and Protection) Act, 2015, Section 92(a) and 92(b) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 in Crime No.333 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is a social science teacher in the Government Higher Secondary School for deaf and dumb students and she used to beat and harass the students and hence complaint has been lodged to the defacto complainant, based on the same, Child Protection Officer has conducted an inspection. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the parents have already given representations indicating teachers have not harassed the students. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the investigation is pending. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and since custodial interrogation is not required, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions:

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on is appearance, within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Salem on condition that each of the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition that:

[a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 06.30.p.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 11.12.2025 sma

To

1. Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Salem 2.Inspector of Police, Kannankuruchi Police Station, Salem City.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

sma 11.12.2025