Sundari v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twentieth day of October Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.20430 of 2015 1 SUNDARI 2 DEEPAN@NARI ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 3 & 4 Vs THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THADIKOMBU POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO. 411 OF 2015) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT FOR PETITIONER : M/S T.LENIN KUMAR ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT : A.P.BALASUBRAMANI, 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 307, 498(A) IPC and 4 of TNPHW Act and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in Crime No.411 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. It is represented by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and the Accused Nos.1 and 2 have already been arrested and enlarged on bail.

3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the injured had already been discharged from the hospital and Accused Nos.1 and 2 have already been arrested and enlarged on bail, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Dindigul, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

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

[a] the first petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation and the second petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 06:30 p.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

[b] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[d] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [e] The Inspector of Police concerned is directed to send a compliance report to the Office of the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side), whether the second petitioner is complying with the order or not.

sd/- 20/10/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, DINDIGUL.

2. DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DINDIGUL.

3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THADIKOMBU POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

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

+1. CC to M/S T.LENIN KUMAR Advocate SR.No. 62242

ORDER

IN 2P/6C CRL OP(MD) No.20430 of 2015 TE/MP/SAR-II : 20/10/2015 Date :20/10/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/