Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/13817/2015ordered

Muthiah v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

2015-09-14Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Fourteenth day of September Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.13817 of 2015 MUTHIAH ..PETITIONER/1st ACCUSED Vs.

STATE REP.BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MELUR, MADURAI.

(CRIME NO.77 OF 2015) ..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.V.JANAKIRAMULU Advocate For Respondent : M/s.S.PRABHA, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.T.A.EBENEZER, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as A1, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 498(A) and 506(ii) I.P.C., in Crime No.77 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the intervenor that as per the earlier order of this Court, the petitioner/accused has handed over jewels and Srethana articles to the de-facto complainant.

3. The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that the defacto complainant has given Rs.3 laksh as dowry, which is not returned by the accused. However, it is disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

4.The Case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/accused harassed the de-facto complainant demanding additional dowry.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and the in-laws were already granted anticipatory bail by this court.

6. The learned counsel for the intervenor vehementaly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.Heard the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondent police.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur, and on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

9. 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/- 14/09/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MELUR, MADURAI DISTRICT. 2 -do-thro' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI. 3 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI. 4 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MELUR, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S.V.JANAKIRAMULU Advocate SR.No.54314 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.13817 of 2015 Date :14/09/2015 PBK/SK-SKN/SAR-II 15/09/2015 ::2P-6C::

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