Ranjith Kumar v. State Rep.By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Eighth day of October Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.20214 of 2021 1 RANJITH KUMAR [ PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED ] 2 POONGODI 3 GUNASEKARAN 4 BALAJI Vs STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AWPS TIRUVANNAMALAI, TIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.
CRIME NO.28/2021 For Petitioner : M/S.MK.GAUTHAMAN Advocate For Respondent : MR. A.GOPINATH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable u/s. 498A, 294 (b) and 323 of IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.28 of 2021 seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant was married to A1. It is alleged that the petitioners demanded more dowry from the defacto complainant and thereby abused her in filthy language. Based on the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant, the respondent police registered a case.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners did not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners . 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that the petitioners family demanded 3lakhs rupees as dowry from the defacto complainant and thereby abused her. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners . 5.Considering the allegation level against A1, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to A1. However no serious allegations was made against other petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to other petitioners A2, A3, &A4.
6. Accordingly, the petitioners 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 Hon'ble Additional Mahila Court, Thiruvannamalai on condition that the petitioners 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 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 petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;
(b) the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;
(c) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(d) the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(e) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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]; and;
(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.
-sd/- 28/10/2021 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 ADDITIONAL MAHILA COURT, THIRUVANNAMALAI.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AWPS TIRUVANNAMALAI, TIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.
CC to M/S.MK.GAUTHAMAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.20214/2021 Date :28/10/2021 RW 15/11/2021