Leroux Marie Stella Denise vs The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police
2026 Latest Caselaw 2417 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2417 Mad
Judgement Date : 7 May, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Leroux Marie Stella Denise vs The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police on 7 May, 2026

                                                                           CRL OP No. 11941 of 2026


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                   DATED: 07-05-2026
                                                       CORAM
                                  THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
                                        CRL OP No. 11941 of 2026
                Leroux Marie Stella Denise
                                                                           ..Petitioner/ Accused
                                                                                            No.2
                                                          Vs
                The State, represented by
                The Inspector of Police,
                Grand Bazar Police station,
                Puducherry District,
                (Crime No.67 of 2026)
                                                                                  ..Respondent

                Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., 2023, to
                enlarge the petitioner / 2nd Accused on bail in the event of the arrest in Crime
                No.67 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Grand Bazar Police Station,
                Puducherry District.


                              For Petitioner(s):       Mr.A.Thiyagarajan


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


                                                       ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections

189(2), 324(4), 329(4), 296(b), 118(2), 115(2), 305(a), 351(2) r/w 190 of

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita’2023 in Crime No.67 of 2026 on the file of the

respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

__________ Page1 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2. The case of the prosecution is that there is a Civil/ property dispute

between the defacto complainant and the family members of the petitioner.

On 27.04.2026 at about 10.30 a.m., the accused No.1 & 2 and along with some

other persons, alleged entered into the premises of the defacto complainant and

demanded that the premises be vacated. At that time, all the accused allegedly

intercepted the defacto complainant, attacked the family members of the defacto

complainant, and assaulted his brothers. Due to the said assault, the de-facto

complainant sustained grievous injuries and was admitted to the hospital for

treatment. Hence, the case.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the

petitioner is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he

prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

respondent, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail, reiterated the

prosecution case and, on instructions, submitted that the injured has been

discharged from the hospital.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

__________ Page2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions

made by the learned counsels on either side, this Court is inclined to grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail

on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only)

with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial

Magistrate No.II, Puducherry, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks; thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[d] the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required; [e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses; [f] the petitioner to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;

__________ Page3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

[g] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];