Rajkumar Vs The State Represented by Sub Inspector of Police

To enlarge the petitioner/accused- 1 on bail in the event of his arrest, in the crime Number 2l l of 2025,pending investigation on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kandili Police Station, Tirupattur District and thus renders justice

¶15

For Petitioner(s): Elaiyaraja S R. Krishnamurthy

¶16

K. Hemalatha

¶17

For Respondent(s): Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

CRL OP No. 27653 of 2025

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under

¶22

Sections 6(a), 6(b), 23 of Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prevention of sex Selection) Act 1994 in Crime No.211 of 2025 on the file of

¶23

the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶24

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 11.08.2025, the defacto complainant is lodged this complaint stating that on inspection, it came to light

¶25

that the petitioner and other accused had been taking scan to verify whether the

¶26

fetus was a male or female, which is against the law. Hence the case.

¶27

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the co-accused already

¶28

granted bail in Crl.O.P.No.24822 of 2025 dated 12.09.2025 and he is falsely

¶29

implicated in this case. Therefore, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail.

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

CRL OP No. 27653 of 2025

¶32

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the

¶33

respondent opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who arrayed

¶34

as an accused by stating that he was indulged in taking scan to verify whether

¶35

the foetus was a male or female.

¶36

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶37

Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and also perused the

¶38

materials available on record.

¶39

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that

¶40

the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

¶41

(a) Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the

¶42

event of arrest or on his/her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the

¶43

date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-

¶44

II, Tirupattur on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

CRL OP No. 27653 of 2025

¶47

Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), with two sureties, each for a like sum

¶48

to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the said Magistrate, failing which, the petition for

¶49

anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶50

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent everyday at 10:30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

¶51

[c] the petitioner is directed to file an affidavit that he will not indulge in any such activities in future.

¶52

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

¶53

[e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶54

[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

¶55

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶56

CRL OP No. 27653 of 2025

¶57

laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

¶58

[ g ] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under

¶59

Section 269 of BNS.

¶60

10-10-2025