Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/17688/2015disposed of

ùMar Farook v. The Inspector Of Police

2015-09-11Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Eleventh day of September Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.17688 of 2015 1 ÙMAR FAROOK 2 SAIDA @ SAIDA BANU 3 SHAHILA BEGAM 4 SYED ABDUDHAHIR ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANNAVASAL POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT. (CR. NO. 103 OF 2015.) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT FOR PETITIONER : M/S D.VENKATESH ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT : MRS.S.PRABHA, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as accused, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under sections 147, 294(b), 452 and 506(ii) of I.P.C., in Crime No.103 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused entered into the house of the de-facto complainant and also attacked them with aruval.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the de-facto complainant is none other than the husband of the third petitioner. It is further submitted that the third petitioner lodged a complaint against the de-facto complainant on 21.07.2015 for dowry harassment and since no action has been taken, she filed a petition before the Judicial Magistrate and a direction was given under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., and based on the order, the All Women Police Station, Karaikudi has registered a case against the de-facto complainant on 01.09.2015 in Crime No.231 of 2015 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 447, 498(A) and 506(ii) of I.P.C. and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and thereafter, the present complaint is given implicating all the family members of the third petitioner.

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 petitioners with

certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi 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 shall appear before the respondent police as and when required. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

6. 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 stands dismissed.

sd/- 11/09/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO

1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KARAIKUDI.

2. DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT.

3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANNAVASAL POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT.

4. THE OFFICERS INCHARGE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, KARAIKUDI.

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

+1. CC to M/S D.VENKATESH Advocate SR.No. 53722

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.17688 of 2015 Date :11/09/2015 2P/7C TE/JGB-DP/SAR-I 18/09/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/