JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.252 of 2023 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Perambur Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District.)

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 448, 354(B), 294(b), 506(i) of IPC in Crime No.252 of 2023, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant was living with her father-in-law and mother-in-law. Her husband is working in abroad. On 10.06.2022 at about 9.30PM leaving the front and back entrance open they went for sleep. At about 11.50PM accused entered into the house of the de-facto complainant and tried to grab her leg. At that time, the de-facto complainant shouted and her in-laws came there. The accused had threatened them not to disclose the same to anyone. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely complicated in this case. The entire allegation in the F.I.R was invented only for the purpose of the case and to arm twist the petitioner in the guise of sexual nature. He further submitted that it is seen from the F.I.R that the de-facto complainant left the front and back entrance open in the night and it is relevant that no prudent human will leave their house open at night. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent would submit that on 10.06.2023 at about 11.50PM the petitioner entered into the house of the de-facto complainant and tried to misbehave with her. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

6. After going through the contents of the F.I.R, I find that there is a civil dispute between the parties and the respondent-police, Perambur Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District has taken the complaint and registered the case and started chasing the accused without even enquiring the prima facie nature of the contents therein.

7. It appears from the contents that the respondent-police has not applied his mind as to the contents before registering the F.I.R and hence the Superintendent of Police, Perambur Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District is hereby directed to look into the matter and to hold an enquiry on coming into the existence of the said F.I.R and to take appropriate action against the erring police officials. Such an exercise has to be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the compliance report to be filed before this Court after expiry of the above said period.

8. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

9. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Tharangambadi, on condition that the petitioner shall execute his own bond for a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar c