S. Suresh v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Ninth day of January Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.1347 of 2018 1 S.SURESH 2 V.SELVARAJ 3 SELVARANI ... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, JEEYAPURAM, TRICHY DISTRICT.

IN CRIME NO.01/2018 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioners: M/S.P.GANAPATHI SUBRAMANIAN, Advocate For Respondent : M/S.A.ROBINSON, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners/A1 to A3, who apprend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 417 and 506(ii) of IPC., in Crime No.1 of 2018, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner married the defacto complainant on 17.11.2017 at Vekkaliamman Kovil, Trichy, thereby he deserted her. Hence, the case has been registered against the petitioners for the above incident.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that by suppressing the fact that the defacto complainant is suffering from incurable disease, she married the petitioner. Hence, the first petitioner filed a HMOP before the learned Principal Sub Judge, Trichy, for the relief of divorce and the same is pending. Thereafter, the defacto complainant lodged the present complaint. He further submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent on instructions, would submit that for the past 10 years the petitioner had love affair with the defacto complainant and now he refused to marry her. He further submitted that the investigation is in progress.

5. The submissions made by the learned counsel on either side are considered. According to the prosecution, the first petitioner herein filed an application before the Principal Sub Court, Trichy, for the relief of divorce in which the defacto complainant was shown as his wife. The second and third petitioners are parents of the first petitioner. According to the submission made by the petitioners, the defacto complainant is the legally wedded wife of the first petitioner. But this case was registered for the offence under Sections 417 and 506(ii) of IPC. Moreover, except the offence under Section 506(ii) of IPC, the other petition mentioned offence is bailable in nature. Hence, considering the actual aspects in this case, custodial interrogation may not be necessary for completing the investigation.

Accordingly, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Trichy, on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: (i) the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.

(ii) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(iii) the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(iv) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners shall stand automatically cancelled and 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].

sd/- 29/01/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.III, TRICHY.

2. DO-THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY DISTRICT.

3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, JEEYAPURAM, TRICHY DISTRICT.

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

+1. CC to M/S.P.GANAPATHI SUBRAMANIAN Advocate SR.No.1443

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.1347 of 2018 Date :29/01/2018 MS/CM-VR/SAR.4/06.02.2018/3P.6C