Meenakkumari v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 24/02/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVEL Meenakkumari ... Petitioner/A1 Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Thiruverumbur Police Station, Tiruchirappalli District.
... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr. S.Krishnan Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory bail in Crime No. 62 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent-Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner on 20.02.2025 under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, praying to grant an order of pre-arrest bail.
1/6
2. The petitioner / Accused No.1 apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent-police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 133, 351
(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 in Crime No.62 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.
3. The case for the prosecution is that on 12.02.2025, the defacto complainant and her husband went to the Beauty Parlour of the petitioner and asked her to repay an amount of Rs.50,000/-, which was received by her as loan and at that time, the petitioner and her husband abused the defacto complainant and her husband in filthy language. Further, on the same day at about 7.45 pm, the accused persons unlawfully assembled in front of the house of the defacto complainant and attacked her and her husband also threatened them with dire consequences. Hence, the case.
4. Mr.S. Krishnan, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and she has been falsely implicated in this case. He, however, submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. He therefore prays for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
5. Per contra, Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent-police, submits that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner and the injured was treated as an out-patient. He 2/6
further submits that the investigation of the case is pending and therefore, at this stage, if the petitioner is granted bail, he will cause threat to the defacto complainant and her husband. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss this Criminal Original Petition.
6. Heard on both sides. This Court has perused the records.
7. In view of the offence alleged against the petitioner, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary in this case. The petitioner has permanent residence and deep roots in the society and therefore, there is less possibility for absconding. Considering the same and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the fact that the injured was treated as an out-patient and with a view to give an opportunity to reform herself, this Court is inclined to grant an order of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions.
(i) The petitioner shall be released on pre-arrest bail in the event of her arrest or in the event of her surrender before the learned Additional Mahila Judge (Magisterial level), Trichy, within a period of 15 days from date on which the order copy is made ready, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Mahila Judge (Magisterial level), Trichy.
3/6
(ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the Application for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned learned Additional Mahila Judge (Magisterial level), Trichy, shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity. (iii) The petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent-police daily at 10.00 am until further orders.
(iv) The petitioner shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
(v) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. (vi) The petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
(vii) The petitioner shall not enter into the defacto complainant's house or her work place.
(viii) The petitioner shall furnish her residential address and mobile number to the concerned Magistrate.
(ix) The petitioner shall not, directly, or indirectly, cause threat to the defacto complainant and her husband and tamper with the evidence. 4/6
(x) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate or Trial Court, as the case may be, is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions are imposed by her as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283].
8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to the conditions stated supra.
sd/- 24/02/2025 / TRUE COPY / /03/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TRP TO 1 THE ADDITIONAL MAHILA JUDGE (MAGISTERIAL LEVEL), TRICHY.
2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY DISTRICT.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVERUMBUR POLICE STATION, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 5/6
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.3460 of 2025 Date :24/02/2025 SA/SKN/SAR. /12.03.2025/6P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023. 6/6