Nagalakshmi v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Chathirapatti

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10/12/2025 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

1. Nagalakshmi

2. Sankarapandi

3. M.Loganathan ... Petitioners/A1,A2&A4 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep., by, The Inspector of Police, Chathirapatti Police Station, Madurai District.

(In Crime No.27/2025).

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-33 AB. For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 27/2025 on the file of the respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) of BNS (Corresponding sections 294(b), 323 and 324 of IPC) r/w Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, in Crime No.27 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant are sisters. On 03.12.2025, the petitioners along with other accused persons trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and demanded two sovereigns of gold jewels which was given to the defacto complainant's son for his marriage and they have abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and attacked her and caused injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offences as alleged 2/6

by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital and there is one previous case against A1 and there is no previous case pending against the other petitioners and the investigation is almost completed. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,and considering the relationship of the parties and inspite of the first petitioner has one previous case and also considering the age of the petitioners 2&3, who are 20 years and 19 years old, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions. 3/6

6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, on condition that each of the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy is made ready and on further conditions that:

[a]the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday and Sunday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

4/6

[c]the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[d]the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e]On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 are 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];

[f]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

10.12.2025 PJL 5/6

S.SRIMATHY,J PJL TO

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur.

2. Do-Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai District.

3. The Inspector of Police, Chathirapatti Police Station, Madurai District.

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

CRL OP(MD) No.22666 of 2025 Date : 10/12/2025 6/6