Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/18110/2014disposed of

Mohammad Farook v. The Inspector Of Police

2015-02-09Honourable Mr Justice P. N. Prakash2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Ninth day of February Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.18110 of 2014 1 MOHAMMAD FAROOK 2 SOWKATH ALI 3 ANIZ FATHIMA 4 SIDDIQ JASSIMA ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4 Vs STATE REPRESENED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MADURAI TOWN, CRIME NO. 12 OF 2014 ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.T.R.JEYAPALAM Advocate For Respondent : M/S.A.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN Govt. 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 punishable under Sections 498(A), 406 and 294(b) of Indian Penal Code, in Crime No.12 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. Initially, the matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, attached to this Bench and failure report dated 04.12.2014 has been received.

3. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent.

4. The respondent police is also present. It is seen that the first petitioner got married to the defacto complainant on 13.05.1990 and they have two children through the wedlock. The eldest daughter is studying M.E. and the second son is studying Plus Two. The First Information Report in this case has been registered, pursuant to the direction issued by this Court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5. On a reading of the complaint, it is seen that the allegations are not very serious. Even, according to the prosecution case, the defacto complainant and the first petitioner are living under the single roof. According to the defacto complainant, her grievance is that the first petitioner should sell the family property and give her a share.

6. It is seen that interim anticipatory bail was granted by this Court on 25.09.2014. Under such circumstances, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners is made absolute. The petitioners need not execute any fresh sureties, as the sureties already executed for the purpose of availing interim anticipatory bail shall hold good. However, the petitioners have to appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. sd/- 09/02/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.4, MADURAI.

2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE MADURAI.

3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT MADURAI 4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MADURAI TOWN.

+1. CC to M/S.T.R.JEYAPALAM Advocate SR.No.6113 RL/6 C- 11/2/2015

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.18110 of 2014 Date :09/02/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/