Alagumuthupandi v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Third day of September Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD) No.3712 of 2018 1 ALAGUMUTHUPANDI 2 KRISHNAN 3 SUBBAMMAL 4 SEETHALAKSHMI @ GEETHA 5 KANDASAMY ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED NO.1 TO 5 Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, THIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT.
IN CRIME NO. 04/2018 ... RESPONDENT(S) / COMPLAINANT(S) For Petitioner : MR.R.UDHAYAKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : MRS. M.ANANTHA DEVI Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police in Cr.No.4 of 2018 on the file of the respondent police, for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406, 294(b), 506(ii) IPC, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant has preferred a complaint on 10.06.2017. Based on the complaint, a case was registered on 26.01.2018. Thereafter, the defacto complainant preferred a case in D.V.O.P.No.3 of 2018 as against the accused.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the mother in law of the defacto complainant received a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to arrange a Government job for the defacto complainant. Thereafter, she failed to arrange any job to the
defacto complainant. The first petitioner demanded the defacto complainant's mother to return back the said amount. Therefore, false complaint has been lodged as against the first petitioner and others. They did not indulge any criminal activities as alleged by the prosecution.
4.Further more, the defacto complainant also filed a complaint under Domestic Violance Act, in D.V.O.P.No.3 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Thirumangalam, Madurai District. It is also pending.
5.The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that the petitioners demanded a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and also 15 sovereigns gold from the defacto complainant. Further, they also tried to pour kerosine on the defacto complainant to set fire, she was escaped. From the said incident the learned counsel for the intervenor vehemently objected to give anticipatory bail to the petitioners and also seeking interim maintenance to the defacto complainant. But, the defacto complainant also filed a maintenance case and the same is pending.
6.Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the State.
7.Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Thirumangalam, Madurai District and on their 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the conditions stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.
8.The petitioners 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 shall stand dismissed.
sd/- 03/09/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THIRUMANGALAM 2 DO THROUG THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE MADURAI DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, THIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.R.UDHAYAKUMAR Advocate SR.No.16712
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.3712 of 2018 Date :03/09/2018 MSI/RR/SAR-IV/12.09.2018-3P/6C