Gokila v. The State, Represented By, Its,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.12.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.34354 of 2025 1.Gokila 2.Mythili @ Suji ... Petitioners Vs.
The State rep by The Inspector of Police, E-3, Saravanampatty Police Station, Coimbatore District.
... Respondent (Crime No.80 of 2024) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR in Cr.No.80 of 2024, pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioners : Mr.Berlin Prabhu For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 143, 323, 506(1), 379 of IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act in Cr.No.80 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
1/6
2. The allegation against the petitioners is that, due to a family quarrel, they attacked the defacto complainant and her friend, snatched away her mobile phone, cash of Rs.30,000/-, and 3 sovereigns of gold chain, and abducted her. On the way, she was rescued by the police. Thereafter, she was admitted to the hospital and lodged the complaint. Hence, the present case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners herein are arrayed as A1 and A3, that the allegations levelled against them are unbelievable, that they have been falsely implicated in the present case, and that they are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are totally five accused involved in this case, out of whom the petitioners are arrayed as A1 and A3. He further submitted that no one has been arrested so far and that no property has been recovered. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. I have perused the FIR. It reveals that, while the defacto complainant was being abducted and was travelling along with the accused, the police intercepted the vehicle and rescued her. Thereafter, she went to 2/6
police station and was subsequently admitted to the hospital, after which she lodged the complaint. It is alleged that the jewels belonging to the defacto complainant were taken away by the accused, including the petitioners herein.
6. Considering the facts that the defacto complainant was rescued in the year 2024 and FIR was registered, and the investigation is pending from the year 2024, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.
7. 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, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Coimbatore on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute separate bonds for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition that: (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 3/6
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 three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;
(d) The petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (e) The petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial:
(f) 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 anticipatory 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]; (g)If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.
16.12.2025 Vv 4/6
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate-II,Coimbatore.
2. The The Inspector of Police, E-3, Saravanampatty Police Station, Coimbatore District.
3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.
5/6
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
Vv Crl.O.P.No.34354 of 2025 16.12.2025 6/6