Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/1586/2020partly allowed

Manikandan v. The Inspector Of Police

2020-02-10Honourable Mr Justice G.R.Swaminathan2 pages

CRL OP(MD). No.1586 of 2020 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10/02/2020 PRESENT The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN CRL OP(MD). No.1586 of 2020

1. Manikandan

2. Ganesan

3. Kasthuri ... Petitioners/Accused (Rank Not Known) Vs State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Jeeyapuram, Trichy District.

(Crime No.(No Known) of 2019) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : M/s.M.Pitchai Muthu, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.A.Robinson, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.5 of 2019 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned counsel appearing for the intervenor and the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent.

2. The petitioners apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 294(b), 498(A) of I.P.C., and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.5 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

CRL OP(MD). No.1586 of 2020

3. The intervenor's counsel produced medical records to show that the victim was brutally beaten by the first petitioner herein. He would further allege that violence was inflicted on the victim only for the purpose of securing additional dowry. 4.On carefully going through the entire materials on record, I am of the view that arrest of the petitioners 2 and 3 is not necessary. However, the first petitioner by his conduct is shown that it is not a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. Hence, this petition is dismissed as regards the first petitioner. Anticipatory bail is granted as regards the petitioners 2 and 3.

5. In view of the above, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 2 and 3 with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners 2 and 3 are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Additional Mahila Court (Magisterial Level), Trichy, Trichy District, and on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only)each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners 2 and 3 shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners 2 and 3 shall comply with the conditions stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C scrupulously.

6. The petitioners 2 and 3 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/- 10/02/2020 / TRUE COPY / / /2020 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

1. THE JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MAHILA COURT(MAGISTERIAL LEVEL), TRICHY, TRICHY DISTRICT.

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.M.PITCHAI MUTHU, Advocate ( SR-2786[I] dated 11/02/2020 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.1586 of 2020 Date :10/02/2020 MS/VR/SAR-4/11.02.2020/2P.6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2