Padmavathi, F/48 Years, v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Thirtieth day of May Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice N.SATHISH KUMAR CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.13476 of 2018 PADMAVATHI [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP. BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, G-3, KILPAUK POLICE STATION, CHENNAI. CR.NO.150/2018 For Petitioner : M/S.R.RAMAMOORTHY Advocate For Respondent : M/S.M.PRABHAVATHI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable u/s.294[b], 323, 353 of IPC in Crime No.150/2018, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, due to wordy quarrel, the petitioner said to have attacked the defacto complainant, a Doctor by profession and caused injuries on her.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that the petitioner admitted her husband in KMC Hospital for treatment and that despite treatment he died on the same day and suspecting that the complainant has not given proper treatment, the petitioner attacked her and the injured has been discharged from the hospital and that there is no previous case against the petitioner.

4. Taking into consideration the nature of allegations against the petitioner in the FIR and the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Accordingly, the petitioner are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate, Allikkulam, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioner shall report before respondent police daily at 6.30 p.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

[b] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

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

[d] 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 laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [e] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

-sd/- 30/05/2018 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE II METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE ALLIKKULAM, CHENNAI.

2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI.

[FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, G-3, KILPAUK POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1CC to M/S.R.RAMAMOORTHY Advocate on payment of necessary charges in SR.NO. 9576 CRL OP.13476/2018 Date :30/05/2018 MLT-31/05/2018