Srinivasan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Third day of July Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.12309 of 2015 1 SRINIVASAN 2 DHANAPAL ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Nos.1 & 3 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ARANTHANGI POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DT, CRIME NO.261/2015 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.D.RAMESHKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1 and A3 in Crime No.261 of 2015 on the file of the respondent Police, were arrested on 19.06.2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 366-A IPC and they seek bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused have kidnapped the victim for forcible marriage.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the victim and the accused are relatives and the first accused is the uncle of the de facto complainant. The learned counsel further submitted that the father of the girl is willing for marriage of his daughter with the first accused, which was not agreed by his wife and she has a proposal to give her daughter to her close relative and therefore, the de facto complainant gave a false complaint against the accused.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the father of the victim girl has filed an affidavit to that effect before the Sessions Court and he has also produced the copy of the affidavit dated 26.06.2015 before this Court.

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

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the first accused is the close relative of the de facto complainant and the accused have kidnapped the victim on 18.06.2015 in a car and when she was raising hue and cry, the accused had left the victim. It is further submitted that the victim is now secured.

6.Considering the facts, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail 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 of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aranthangi, and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily twice at 10.00 a.m. and 5.30 pm, until further orders.

sd/- 03/07/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ARANTHANGI,PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT.

2 DO-THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT.

3 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, DISTRICT PRISON,PUDUKKOTTAI.

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ARANTHANGI POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DT.

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

+1. CC to M/S.D.RAMESHKUMAR Advocate SR.No.36151

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.12309 of 2015 Date :03/07/2015 PA/SJW/06.07.2015/2P/7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/