Shalomi v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Second day of July Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.21262 of 2014 1 SHALOMI ... 1st Petitioner/4th Accused 2 IMMANUVEL ... 2nd Petitioner/5th Accused 3 JEBHAN ... 3rd Petitioner/6th Accused 4 ANITA GRACE ... 4th Petitioner/7th Accused Vs state of Tamilnadu Represented by THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMENS POLICE STATION, THIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT. CRIME NO.39/2014 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT Joice Jeyarani ... Intervenor For Petitioner : M/S.R.MANICKAM Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : M/s.V.RAJIV RUFUS PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as accused, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 498(A) and 506(i) I.P.C., and Section 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Women's Harassment Act, in Crime No.39 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused have demanded more dowry from the de-facto complainant and also harassed her. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case.

4.The learned counsel for the intervenor strongly objected this application stating that the de-facto complainant has preferred a complaint against the accused in the year 2007 and after reunion also, the accused have harassed the de-facto complainant for demanding more dowry. He further submitted that 5 sovereign of gold jewels are with the accused.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit that the petitioners are in-laws and the respondent police has completed the investigation and also laid charge sheet, which is taken on file in C.C.No.61 of 2015.

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, Thirumangalam and on each of them 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 petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 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/- 02/07/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUMANGALAM 2 -DO-THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMENS POLICE STATION, THIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT.

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

+1. CC to M/S.R.MANICKAM Advocate SR.No.36366 Sm:AMF:07.07.2015:2P/5C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.21262 of 2014 Date :02/07/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/