R Emayavaramabn v. State Rep.By

RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

The brief facts of the case is that the first anticipatory bail application filed by the accused A1 to A5 in Crl.O.P.No.19556 of 2023 came to be disposed of by this Court, by an order dated 15.09.2003. By that order while the accused A2 and A3, who were females granted anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application filed by the accused A1, A4 and A5 was dismissed. 2.

It appears that the accused A1, A4 and A5 again moved this Court with another anticipatory bail application in Crl.O.P.No.23213 of 2023 and that was also dismissed. Now, the accused A1 and A4 have alone approached this Court in Crl.O.P.No.6380 of 2024.

3.

As per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, since the earlier anticipatory bail application was dismissed by this Court, by an administrative order, this case is posted today before this Court. 4.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioners herein namely A4 and A5, there is no specific overt act against them in the complaint. 1/3

5.

The Public Prosecutor stated that the A1 father-in-law of the defacto complainant was arrested and remanded to judicial custody and after more than 55 days, he was granted bail and the matter is under investigation. 6.

A Domestic Violence application has also been filed before the concerned authority namely Judicial Magistrate, Sirkazhi in D.V.C.No.9 of 2023 wherein the Widow of the deceased has sought for a protection order, the right of residence and for other reliefs.

7.

After perusing the documents filed before this Court and the orders passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.23213 of 2013, I find that there is no change in circumstances. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 27.03.2024 dpa 2/3

RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

dpa 27.03.2024 3/3