Lakshmi v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30/07/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI Lakshmi, W/o.Sathishkumar, ..Petitioner/ Accused No.2 Vs The State of Tamilnadu rep.by The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Police Station, Madurai District.

(Crime No.11 of 2025) .. Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Arokia Selva Ramesh Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.11 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : This Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused No.2, who was arrested and remanded to judicial 1/6

custody on 04.07.2025 for the offences punishable under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Amendment Act, 2018 @ 7(a) and 12 of Prevention of Corruption Amendment Act in Crime No.11 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto-complainant is a retired teacher, first accused is the Sub-Treasury Officer, Peraiyur, Madurai and this petitioner is the Office Assistant in the above said office. The defacto-complainant approached the A1 seeking her retirement benefits for which, A1 demanded Rs.11,000/- as bribe amount from the defacto-complainant to process her application. The defactocomplainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police. As per the complaint given by the defacto-complainant, the Vigilance officials had conducted a trap proceedings on 04.07.2025, at that time, the first accused directed the defactocomplainant to handover the money to this petitioner, who is working as Office Assistant in the said office, as per the direction of the first accused, this petitioner had received the bribe amount from the defacto-complainant. This petitioner was caught red-handed by the Vigilance officials. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this petitioner was 2/6

falsely implicated in the said case, at the instigation of the first accused only this petitioner received the bribe amount. The first accused only demanded bribe money from the defacto-complainant. This petitioner is an innocent person and she has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner is ready and willing to abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody from 04.07.2025, nearly 27 days. Hence, he seeks bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that this petitioner working as a Office Assistant in the Treasury Office, Madurai. The first accused demanded Rs.11,000/- as bribe from the Defacto-complainant for processing her retirement benefit application. The Defacto-complainant lodged a complaint before the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Unit, Madurai, based on her complaint, a trap proceedings was conducted on 04.07.2025, on behalf of the first accused, this petitioner received the bribe amount of Rs.11,000/-. she caught red handed by the respondent police and she arrested and remanded on 04.07.2025. The tainted currency notes were recovered from the petitioner. It is the clear case of demand and acceptance of bribe money. There is no previous case against the petitioner. However, he objected to grant bail to the petitioner. 3/6

5.Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the fact that in this case, the entire property were recovered from the petitioner, there is no previous case against this petitioner, the petitioner/accused No.2 remanded into judicial custody on 04.07.2025, taking into consideration of the period of incarceration, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing 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 learned Principal District Court, Madurai and on further conditions that :- [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

[b] The petitioner shall furnish her residential address and contact number to the learned Principal District Court, Madurai. If the petitioner changes her residential address, she shall report the same to the learned Principal District Court, Madurai;

4/6

[c] the petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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)AIR SCW 5560]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

sd/- 30/07/2025 / TRUE COPY / /07/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

GVN TO

1. THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT COURT, MADURAI 5/6

2. THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON FOR WOMEN, MADURAI.

3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION WING, MADURAI.

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

+1. CC to M/S. S. AROKIA SELVA RAMESH Advocate SR.No.8179 (I) DT.30/07/2025

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.12803 of 2025 Date :30/07/2025 NM/30.07.2025/ 6P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 6/6