M. Mahendran v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Ninth day of October Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.20412 of 2015 1 M. MAHENDRAN 2 MOOKKAIAH 3 SEENIAMMAL 4 SELVI 5 M. CHINNADURAI 6 M. CHELLADURAI 7 M. RAJA ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED nos.1 to 7 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SATTUR ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO. 20 OF 2015) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S K.SEEMARAJ 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 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420 and 109 of the Indian Penal Code also under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act in Crime No.20 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

2 The prosecution case is that the defacto complainant was married to one Anbinraja on 29.01.2012 and thereafter, due to misunderstanding they were living separately. Taking advantage of the situation, the first accused has developed intimacy with the defacto complainant assuring to marry her and thereafter, he married one Kaleeswari in the year 2015. It is further alleged that the first accused was living with the defacto complainant in her sister's house, where she was harassed by all the accused.

3 The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the first petitioner and defacto complainant were already married and the husband of the defacto complainant has filed I.D.O.P.No.25 of 2015 against her for divorce.

4 The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the defacto complainant is aged about 22 years and she has falsely implicated the petitioners in this case.

5 Heard the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side). 6 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions.

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

7 Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Sattur 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 of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the first petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m, until further orders. The other petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the conditions stipulated under Sections 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously. 8 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/- 29/10/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.1 SATTUR 2 DO THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VIRUDHUNAGAR 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SATTUR ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

+1. CC to M/S K.SEEMARAJ Advocate SR.No.63642 JAM /02/11/2015/ SKS-RR/SAR II/2P-5C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.20412 of 2015 Date :29/10/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/