Jemila, v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Seventeenth day of June Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice P.RAJAMANICKAM CRL MP(MD) No.1647 of 2019 IN CRL OP(MD) No.22526 of 2018 JEMILA ... PETITIONER/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT Vs 1 STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, NAGERCOIL, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO.50/2018) ... RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT 2 A.THOMAS RAJA NADAR ... RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.1 Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to cancel the Anticipatory bail granted to the 2nd respondent in Crl.OP (MD)No.22526 of 2018 dated 20.12.2018 on the file of this Honourable Court.

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of MR.P.M.VISHNUVARTHANAN, Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.V.NEELAKANDAN, Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 and MR.R.J..KARTHICK, Advocate for R2, the court made the following order:- This Petition has been filed by the defacto complainant to cancel the anticipatory bail, which was granted to the second respondent in Crl.O.P(MD)No.22526 of 2018, dated 20.12.2018. 2.The learned counsel for the defacto complainant has submitted that this Court while granting anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P(MD) No.22526 of 2018, has recorded the undertaking given by the learned counsel for the second respondent that the second respondent will return all the Sridhana articles to the defacto complainant. But, actually the second respondent has not returned the said articles as https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

per undertaking given by him. Hence, the present petition has been filed. He has further submitted that after filing of this petition, the second respondent has complied with the said condition and hence, this petition has become infructuous.

3.The learned counsel for the second respondent has also submitted that he has complied with the condition on 27.12.2018 itself, and returned all the sridhana articles and therefore, he prayed for dismissal of this petition.

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the second respondent has complied with the said condition. 5.Recording the aforesaid submission, this petition is dismissed.

sd/- 17/06/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTATE, BOOTHAPANDY, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

2.THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT AT NAGERCOIL 3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, NAGERCOIL, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

4.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to MR.P.M.VISHNUVARTHANAN, Advocate SR.No.69828

ORDER

IN CRL MP(MD) No.1647 of 2019 IN CRL OP(MD) No.22526 of 2018 Date :17/06/2019 JM/VR/SAR 2/25.06.2019/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/