Sandeep Amarnath v. Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.01.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.O.P.No.24144 of 2021
1. Sandeep Amarnath
2. Kishore Amarnath
...Petitioners
Versus
State By, The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by the Inspector of Police W-3, All Women Police Station, Egmore, Chennai.
(Crime No.1 of 2021)
...Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.1 of 2021, on the file of the Inspector of Police, W-3, Egmore All Women Police Station, Chennai. For Petitioners : Mr.S.Anil Sandeep For Respondent : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor For Intervenor : K.Balasubramaniam
O R D E R
The petitioners, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 498(A), 354 & 506 (I) of IPC in Crime No.1 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that defacto complainant was forced to leave the matrimonial home, due to physical and mental harassment made by the first petitioner along with his elder brother. Hence, the complaint.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any 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 petitioner. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the first petitioner and his elder brother physically and mentally harassed the defacto complainant. However, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioner along with his counsel and the defacto complainant along with her child appeared before this Court through video conferencing. At the time of argument of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that the first petitioner/husband fairly accepted to pay the maintenance as suggested by this Court.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the investigation is almost completed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 7.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days after lifting of lockdown or the commencement of the Court's normal functioning whichever is earlier, before the Additional Mahila Court(M.M), Egmore, Chennai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 first petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) as interim maintenance every month to the children. The amount may be deposited in the account of the minor children under the guardianship of the defacto complainant in the first week of every English Calender month until further orders, failing which order of anticipatory bail will be canceled. Further, the petitioner is directed to pay the school fees on production of the receipt issued by the school authorities. Thereafter, the defacto complainant has to collect the said amount from the first petitioner. The petitioner is directed to talk with the child daily between 07.00 p.m. to 08.00 p.m., and as a interim visitation right, he is permitted to visit the child at the Family Court, Chennai, on every
Saturday at 10.00 a.m., between 2.00 p.m., and once the lock down is released he may be permitted to visit the minor child in any shopping mall as decided by the first petitioner and the defacto complainant.. (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/- 06/01/2022 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, METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI.
2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE W-3, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, EGMORE, CHENNAI.
4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
5 THE FAMILY COURT, CHENNAI.
+3 CC to M/S. S.ANIL SANDEEP Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.289 CRL OP.24144/2021 Date :06/01/2022 RW 21/01/2022