High Court · 2025

CRL OP (MD) No.4105 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 05/03/2025PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVELCRL OP (MD) No.4105 of 2025Kaliyammal,W/o Late.Natchimuthu, Kulathur, Kakanampatti, Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District. ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 VsThe State of Tamil Nadu,Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Dindigul Taluk Police Station, Dindigul District. Crime No.727/2024. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.J.Lawrance, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.4105 of 2025PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.727 of 2024 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 03.03.2025 underSection 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) praying to grant bail.2. The petitioner / Accused No.2 was arrested and remanded to judicialcustody on 28.12.2024 for the offence punishable under Section 194 of BNSS, 2023 @Section 103 of BNS, 2023 @ Section 103 (1) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.727 of 2024 onthe file of the respondent-police.3. The case of the prosecution is that, based on the complaint lodged by theVillage Administrative Officer of Seelapdi Village, the respondent-police found amale dead body with head injuries in a vacant land near Chinnathai Rice Mill,opposite to Ma.Mu.Kovilur Junction on Dindigul Highway. During the investigation,the respondent-police identified the deceased as one Natchimuthu, the husband ofthe petitioner, and confirmed that he had been murdered, causing head injuries. Thefurther inquiry revealed that Natchimuthu was a coolie worker and that thepetitioner and the deceased had two children. The allegation against the petitioner isthat she was involved in an extramarital relationship with Accused No.1, which ledto frequent quarrel between her and the deceased. Due to the same, the petitioner andthe first accused allegedly conspired to murder Natchimuthu. On 27.12.2024,2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.4105 of 2025Accused No.1 took the deceased to a secluded place, where both consumed liquor.When the deceased was in an inebriated condition, Accused No.1 attacked him with awooden log, causing head injuries. Due to the injuries, the deceased succumbed todeath. Hence, the case.4. Mr.J.Lawrance, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that thepetitioner has nothing to do with the alleged offence. He further submits that thedeceased and Accused No.1 were friends, and they used to consume alcohol togetherand create a nuisance in the area. There was also a money dispute between them, andwhile consuming alcohol, there might have been a scuffle between them over themoney dispute, which could have led to the death of her husband. He furthersubmits that the petitioner had no extramarital relationship with Accused No.1, asalleged by the prosecution. He however submits that she is ready to abide by anyconditions to be imposed by this Court. He further submits that the petitioner hasbeen in incarceration since 28.12.2024 and that she is a married woman, aged about 45years. Therefore, he prays for granting bail to the petitioner.5. Per contra, Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, learned Additional Public Prosecutorappearing for the respondent-police, submits that the investigation has not yet beencompleted. He further submits that the alleged occurrence took place in a secludedlocation, and therefore, further custody of the petitioner is necessary to unearth the3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.4105 of 2025entire truth. He further submits that if bail is granted to the petitioner, she willabscond, cause a threat to the defacto complainant and witnesses and thereby, delaythe investigation. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss this petition.6. Heard the learned counsel on either side. This Court has perused the records. 7. The petitioner is none other than the wife of the deceased, and she has beenin incarceration since 28.12.2024. The petitioner has permanent residence and deeproots in the society and therefore, there is less possibility of absconding. Consideringthe same and also considering the age of the petitioner and the period ofincarceration suffered by the petitioner and with a view to give an opportunity to thepetitioner to reform herself, this Court is inclined to grant an order of bail to thepetitioner, however, subject to the following conditions:(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty FiveThousand only) along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.25,000/- (RupeesTwenty Five Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial MagistrateNo.I, Dindigul;(ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in theApplication for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules ofPractice, 2019']. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dindigul shall obtain a copy ofany one of identity proofs to ensure their identity;4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.4105 of 2025(iii) The petitioner shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond tobe executed under Chapter XXXV of BNS, 2023;(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of she isaccused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected;(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threator promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade himfrom disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with theevidence;(vi) The petitioner shall furnish her residential address and mobile number tothe learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dindigul;(vii) The petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent-Police daily at10.30 a.m., and 05.00, until further orders;(viii) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, cause any threat to thedefacto complainant and witnesses; and(ix) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned JudicialMagistrate No.I, Dindigul is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitionerin accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions are imposed by him aslaid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) 13SCC 283].5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.4105 of 20258. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to theconditions stated supra. sd/- 05/03/2025 / TRUE COPY / 05/03/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TSGTO1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I,DINDIGUL.2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIALMAGISTRATE, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.3 THE SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL PRISON FOR WOMEN, MADURAI.4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DINDIGUL TALUK POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT. 5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.4105 of 2025 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.4105 of 2025 Date :05/03/2025 SA/SAR. /05.03.2025/7P/6CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023. 7/7