Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/2883/2019partly allowed

S.Shanmugaraju, v. The Inspector Of Police,

2019-02-25Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Fifth day of February Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.2883 of 2019 1 S.SHANMUGARAJU 2 ARUMUGAVALLI 3 SETHURAMAN 4 MALLIKA 5 SEKAR 6 MUTHULAKSHMI, ... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED 1 to 6 Vs STATE REP. BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, TALLAKULAM, MADURAI DISTRICT (IN CRIME .NO.4/2019) ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioners : MR.T.SELVAM Advocate For Respondent : K.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI, Government Advocate(Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- ` The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 498(A), 406, 494, 506(i) of IPC, in Cr.No.6 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the marriage of the defacto complainant and the first petitioner was solemnised on 20.01.2008. After their marriage, they blessed with two children. In the year 2017, there was a dispute arose between the petitioner's family and the defacto complainant's family. Due to which the defacto complainant left with matrimonial home and residing at her parental home. Thereafter, she made a complaint on 13.02.2019. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Though there are some allegation against A1, there is no allegation against other petitions. Accordingly, he prayed for anticipatory bail.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State would submit that investigation is still pending. The first petitioner is the husband and other petitioners are in-laws of the defacto complainant. A7 in this case paramour. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to A1.

6.Considering the gravity of offence, this Court is not inclined grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, there is no serious allegations against the petitioners 2 to 6 and since they are being the in-laws of the defacto complainant, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 2 to 6. Accordingly, petitioners 2 to 6 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 Additional Mahila Court, (Judicial Magisterial Level), Madurai, on condition that the petitioners 2 to 6 shall execute 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 respondent police or the police officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

(a)the petitioners 2 to 6 and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b)the petitioners 2 to 6 shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation; (c)the petitioners 2 to 6 shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d)the petitioners 2 to 6 shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(e)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners 2 to 6 in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 2 to 6 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]; and;

(f)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

7.This criminal original petition is dismissed in respect of the first petitioner/A1.

sd/- 25/02/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE ADDITIONAL MAHILA COURT (JUDICIAL MAGISTERIAL LEVEL), MADURAI 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE MADURAI 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, TALLAKULAM, MADURAI DISTRICT 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to MR.T.SELVAM Advocate SR.No.3687

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.2883 of 2019 Date :25/02/2019 MSI/VR/SAR 1/28.02.2019/3P-6C