V.T. Murugan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Seventh day of October Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.17378 of 2015 V.T. MURUGAN ... PETITIONERa / ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, RAMESWARAM TOWN, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

CRIME NO. NOT KNOWN OF 2015 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S M.KANNAN Advocate For Respondent : MRS.S.PRABHA Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is the accused, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Section 498(A) of I.P.C., in Crime No.14 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. According to the de-facto complainant that the first accused had contracted a second marriage when the earlier marriage was subsisting and harassed the de-facto complainant demanding more dowry.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the basis of the earlier complaint, a case was registered against the accused in Crime No.6 of 2009 and the respondent has also filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offences under Sections 498(A), 406 of I.P.C., and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. It is further submitted that the petitioner was honourably acquitted in C.C.No.62 of 2010 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Rameswaram on 30.11.2010 and that the H.M.O.P.No.76 of 2013 filed by the petitioner before the Sub Court, Ramanathapuram against the de-facto complainant for dissolution of the marriage is still pending. The learned counsel has produced a typed set containing judgment made in C.C.No.62 of 2010 and a petition in H.M.O.P.No.76 of 2013.

4. Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side). https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5. 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, Rameswaram District and on his executing a own bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

6. 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/- 07/10/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,RAMESWARAM 2 DO THRO THE CHEIF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION,RAMESWARAM TOWN, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S M.KANNAN Advocate SR.No.59530.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.17378 of 2015 Date :07/10/2015 AM/12.10.2015/NGM.SS/SAR-I/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/