Saravanan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Sixth day of February Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.2416 of 2018 1 SARAVANAN 2 YOGARAJ 3 CHINNASAMY 4 DURAIKANNAN 5 PARAMESWARI ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 1 to 5 Vs STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PUTHANATHAM POLICE STATION, PUTHANATHAM, TRICHY DISTRICT .

(*) IN CRIME No.17 OF 2018 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT Amended as per order of this Hon'ble Court made in CRL MP(MD)No.1411/18 in CRL OP(MD)No.2416/18 dated 26.02.18 For Petitioners : MR.P.GANAPATHI SUBRAMANIAN Advocate For Respondent : Mr.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 A5, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections (*)147 and 366-A of IPC., in (*) Crime No.17 of 2018, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant, one Velusamy lodged a complaint before the respondent police stating that his daughter, namely, Bhuvaneswari, aged about 17 years was found missing from 11.02.2018 onwards and in this regard, he had suspicion over the petitioners as they kidnapped his daughter. Hence, the case has been registered for the above said incident.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they are no way connected with the offence as alleged by the prosecution and prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the victim girl is aged about 17 years and she is not secured so far. According to the prosecution, the investigation is in progress.

5. The submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for either side are considered. It is alleged that during the time of occurrence, the petitioners herein are all kidnapped the daughter of the defacto complainant, aged about 17 years. So far, the victim girl is not secured. Thereby, if anticipatory bail is granted in favour of the petitioners, the process of investigation, particularly, the process of securing the victim girl may be prejudiced. Hence, considering the nature of offence committed by the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

sd/- 26/02/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PUTHANATHAM POLICE STATION, PUTHANATHAM, TRICHY DISTRICT 2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI PJL JAM/15/03/2018/ MM-PN / SAR 3/ 2P-3C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.2416 of 2018 Date :26/02/2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/