Praveen Rajkumar @ Praveen Rajkumar v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 12.03.2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No.4558 of 2025 1.Piraveen Rajkumar @ Praveen Rajkumar 2.Kaleeswari

...Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 3

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

(Crime No.3 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioners : Mr.M.Karuppasamy 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 Cr.No.03 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/5

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 82, 115(2), and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant and the second petitioner is the mother-in-law of the defacto complainant. The petitioners and the other accused persons, from the time of marriage, demanded more money and jewels from the defacto complainant and also tortured her. Now, the first petitioner, who is the husband of the defacto complainant, got married another women with the help of the other accused persons, leaving the defacto complainant and her two children. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly submits that the petitioners and the other accused persons, from the time of marriage, demanded more money and jewels from the defacto complainant and also tortured her. Now, the first petitioner got married another women with the help of the other accused persons. He further submits that the petitioners have no previous case. However, he 2/5

opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners, and the relationship between the parties and also considering the fact that no previous case is pending against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Mahila Court, Ramanathapuram, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, every Saturday at 10.00 a.m. for a period of four weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.

[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 3/5

Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

sd/- 12/03/2025 / TRUE COPY / /03/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.-I/ II /III/ IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

apd TO 1 THE JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MAHILA COURT, RAMANATHAPURAM. 2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1 CC to M/s.M.KARUPPASAMY, Advocate ( SR-2770[I] dated 13/03/2025 ) 4/5

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.4558 of 2025 Date :12/03/2025 NBF/VR / SAR/ (25/03/2025) 5P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5