Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/11005/2015allowed

K.Deepa v. The Inspector Of Police

2015-06-18Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Eighteenth day of June Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.11005 of 2015 K.DEEPA ..PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.2 Vs.

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, TIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT.

CR. NO. 62 OF 2015.

..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.S.VANCHINATHAN Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Government Advocate(Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner/A2 apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 406, 494 and 506(i) I.P.C in Crime No.62 of 2015 and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the first accused married the defacto complainant in the year 2000 and a male child was born to them on 25.11.2004. While so, the first accused had developed intimacy with the second accused/the petitioner herein and thereafter demanded Rs.2 lakhs and also harassed her.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the first accused married the defacto complainant in the year 2000 and after obtaining customary divorce, the first accused had married the petitioner in the year 2010 and they are having two children through the second marriage. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has been falsely implicated in this case. 4.The learned Government Advocate submitted that the accused have joined together and harassed the defacto complainant demanding additional dowry.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the State and also perused the entire materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Thirumangalam, and on 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 to the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

7. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. sd/- 18/06/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT. 2 -DO-THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI. 3 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI. 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, TIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT.

+1. CC to M/S.S.VANCHINATHAN Advocate SR.No.31707 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.11005 of 2015 Date :18/06/2015 PBK/KBM 19/06/2015 ::2P-6C::

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/