Mumtaz Begum v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Papanasam

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 03.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 9616 of 2026 Mumtaz Begum ... Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Papanasam Police Station, Thanjavur District. (Crime No.153 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.K.M.Karunakaran

Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 153 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 318(2), 337 of BNS and 31 of Representation of People Act, in Crime No.153 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner who is a Singapore Citizen, having Indian Voter ID and casted her vote in the Tamil Nadu Assembly Election, 2026, in the Papanasam Assembly Constituency, Thanjavur District. Hence the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and she was falsely implicated in this case and she is no way connected in the above said incident. She has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the offences are grave in nature. The petitioner who is a Singapore Citizen, having Indian Voter ID and casted her vote in the Tamil Nadu Assembly Election, 2026, in the Papanasam Assembly Constituency, Thanjavur District. The petitioner has no previous case. Investigation is still pending. He vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

¶6Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, considering that the petitioner has no previous case, and considering all other facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] 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 Judicial Magistrate, Papanasam, on condition that the petitioner shall execute 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police at 10.30 a.m., every Saturday for a period of four weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation: [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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 laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

(P D B J)

03.06.2026 TM To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Papanasam.

2.The Inspector of Police, Papanasam Police Station, Thanjavur District.

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

P. DHANABAL, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 9616 of 2026 Date : 03.06.2026