M. Mahalakshmi v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.12.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.34486 of 2025 M.Mahalakshmi ... Petitioner Vs.
The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Vaazhapadi Police Station, Salem District.
(Crime No.464 of 2025) .... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner in the event of his arrest by the respondent in connection with Crime No.464 of 2025. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Siranjeevi For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 49, 318(2) of BNS 2023 r/w Section 23(1) of Pre-conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prevention of sex selection) Act 1994 and 34 of National Medical Commission Act, 2019 in Cr.No.464 of 2025, on the file of 1/4
the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that she acted as a broker by bringing pregnant women and facilitating the identification of the gender of the fetus, with the intention that if the foetus was found to be female, female infanticide would be committed. In order to identify the petitioner and other accused, the officials of the Health Department laid a trap. While A1 and other accused were indulging in scanning three pregnant women, they were caught red-handed by the officials. On recording the statement of one of the pregnant women, it was revealed that money had been paid to the petitioner herein. Hence, she has been arrayed as an accused, pursuant to which the present case has been registered.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's bank account was misused by another accused; that she is not involved in the alleged offence; and that she is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed that anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner herein is habitually involved in such offences. He further submitted that one of the victims in this case has specifically stated that she 2/4
paid a sum of Rs.25,000/- to the petitioner, who acted as a broker. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. I have perused the statements recorded from one of the arrested accused and also the statement of the victim incorporated in the FIR, which reveal that the petitioner was actively involved in the commission of the offence. If the petitioner is released on bail, there is a likelihood of her engaging in similar activities. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 17.12.2025 Vv To
1. The Inspector of Police Vaazhapadi Police Station, Salem District.
2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.
3/4
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
Vv Crl.O.P.No.34486 of 2025 17.12.2025 4/4