Sadayandi v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Sixteenth day of September Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.17914 of 2015 SADAYANDI ... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs.

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PATTI VEERAN PATTI POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

(IN CRIME NO. 268 OF 2015) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S R.GANDHI Advocate For Respondent : MRS.S.PRABHA, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as the sole accused, in Crime No.268 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.08.2015, for the alleged offences punishable under Section 174 Cr.P.C altered into Section 306 of IPC., and hence, seeks bail.

2.According to the de-facto complainant that her daughter was given marriage to the accused about three years prior to the occurrence and suspecting her fidelity, she was harassed and further, the accused did not allow the deceased to go for employment and therefore, on 02.08.2015, she committed suicide by consuming poison.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the deceased was an employee in a Postal Department and she had misappropriated the funds of the depositors for which, she was placed under suspension. It is further submitted that the petitioner extended his helping hands and paid Rs.1,50,000/- to the Postal Department and since a criminal case was registered against her, she was in a depressed mode.

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

4.The learned counsel further submitted that from the month of January 2015, she had been in her parental home till she committed suicide on 20.08.2015, however, in the complaint itself falsely alleged that the accused did not allow the deceased to go for employment, which would show that the entire complaint is false. 5.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit that the accused married the deceased only about two years prior to the occurrence and due to the harassment, she committed suicide. It is further submitted that major part of the investigation is over.

6.However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on 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 Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.00 a.m until further orders. sd/- 16/09/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NILAKOTTAI.

2 -DO- THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DINDIGUL. 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

4 THE SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI. 5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PATTI VEERAN PATTI POLICE STATION,DINDIGUL DISTRICT. +1. CC to M/S R.GANDHI Advocate SR.No.54708 Akm/16.09.2015 /2p-7c/ ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.17914 of 2015 Date :16/09/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/