Chinnalagan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Ninth day of June Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.20251 of 2014 1 CHINNALAGAN 2 ANDICHI 3 PONNALAGI 4 PRABU @ ALAGAN ... PETITIONER(S) / ACCUSED 1 to 4 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, VADAMADURAI, DINDIGUL DISTRICT. CR. NO. 23/2014. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.D.SELVARAJ Advocate For Respondent : M/S.K.V.RAJARAJAN Govt. 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 the accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No.23 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 294(b), 323 and 506(i) I.P.C and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

2.According to the defacto complainant namely, Shanthi, she married the fourth petitioner/A4 on 28.09.2013 and thereafter, the accused have demanded dowry and therefore she preferred complainants dated 02.04.2014 and 15.04.2014 before the respondent police and on both occasions, the defacto complainant was taken back by the accused and it continued even thereafter and the accused have demanded 10 sovereigns of jewels and car and also harassed her.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the accused are living in a joint family and the defacto complainant insisted for separate living and it was not accepted by the petitioners and therefore, a false complaint was given roping all the family members in the case. It is further submitted that the petitioners are innocents and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the respondent. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. Heard the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the State.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vedasendur, Dindigul District, and on each of them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two common sureties for a like sum to the satisfaction to the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners 1 to 3 shall appear before the respondent police as and when required and the fourth petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m until further orders. 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/- 29/06/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VEDASENDUR.

2 DO THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DINDIGUL DISTRICT. 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, VADAMADURAI, DINDIGUL DISTRICT. +1. CC to M/S.D.SELVARAJ Advocate SR.No.34600. TS/30.06.2015/2P -6C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.20251 of 2014 Date :29/06/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/