Thangaraj v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Nineteenth day of August Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.20737 of 2014 1 THANGARAJ 2 RAMALAKSHMI ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED A5 & A6 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PULIANGUDI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.
CRIME NO.501 OF 2014 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesan for M/S.RIGHT LAW ASSOCIATES Advocate For Respondent : Mr.P.Kannithevan, 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 accused Nos.5 and 6, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 366(A) and 506(ii) of I.P.C., r/w. Section 4 of Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act in Crime No.501 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.
2. According to the prosecution, the first accused had kidnapped the daughter of the de-facto complainant and also tied Thali by force and when this was questioned, all the accused have joined together and threatened the de-facto complainant with dire consequences.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the accused and the de-facto complainant are close relatives and the first accused had love affair with the daughter of the de-facto complainant and he married her and thereafter, a false complainant was given against the petitioners. It is further submitted that the prime accused was already arrested and released on bail and the petitioners are grand parents of the first accused.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that the daughter of the de-facto complainant is a minor and the first accused has kidnapped her and tied Thali.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri, Tirunelveli and on his 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required. The petitioner shall https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.
6. The petitioner 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/- 19/08/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGIRI, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT 2 -DO-THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PULIANGUDI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1cc to M/s.Right Law Associates R.Venkatesan, Advocate SR.No.47761 sm:AMF:SAR I:24.8.2015:2P/6C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.20737 of 2014 Date :19/08/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/