Sathya v. The State Rep By Its,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.09.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Sathya ... Petitioner Vs.
The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, AWPS, Dharapuram Police Station, Tiruppur District.
(Crime No. 08 of 2024).
... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in Crime No. 08 of 2024 on the file of the respondent Police.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sasindran For Respondent : Mr.S.Vinothkumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.Harishkumar for M/s.HSR Advocates and Legal Consultants 1/6
O R D E R
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13.07.2024, for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 420, 495, 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.08 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner married the defacto complainant by suppressing her previous marriages and swindled money from the defacto complainant and cheated him. Hence, the complaint.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has been falsely implicated in this case. She has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He further submit that the petitioner was arrested and is in judicial custody for more than 55 days and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that A1 has already married to 53 persons and cheated the defacto complainant for his 2/6
money and jewels. After the defacto complainant came to know that the petitioner along with other accused persons have cheated him, due to frustration, the grand father of the defacto complainant had committed suicide. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of this petition.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that there are two accused in this case and the petitioner herein is arrayed as A1. He further submit that the petitioner married the defacto complainant and thereafter, she received money and jewels from him. After that, she escaped from that place. He further submits, during the course of investigation, it was revealed that the petitioner married 7 persons, looted their money, in pretext of marriage. He further submit that the investigation was also completed. However, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.
6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.
3/6
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and also considering the petitioner is in judicial custody for more than 60 days, investigation was also completed, and also considering all others factors, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.
8. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her executing 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 Judicial Magistrate, Dharapuram, and on further conditions that:- [a] the petitioner shall report before the concerned Jurisdictional Magistrate, on all working days at 10.30 a.m, until further orders. [b] the Petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;
[c] the Petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
4/6
[d] the Petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[e] 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]; and [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
12.09.2024 drl 5/6
P.DHANABAL, J.
drl To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Dharapuram.
2.The Inspector of Police, AWPS, Dharapuram Police Station, Tiruppur District.
3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.
4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
12.09.2024 (1⁄2) 6/6