Radhakrishnan v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Ninth day of December Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.23347 of 2015 1 RADHAKRISHNAN 2 AYYAVU 3 LAKSHMI ... PETITIONER(S) / ACCUSED 1 to 3 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MELUR, MADURAI DISTRICT.
(CRIME NO. 46/2014) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S S.SUKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : M/S.K.Anbarasan Government 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.1 to 3, in Crime No.46 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code and hence, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner married the defacto complainant and received amounts and jewels and the defacto complainant also gave 30 sovereigns of gold jewels to the first petitioner for the marriage of his sister and subsequently, the petitioners 2 and 3 are arranging marriage for the first petitioner with another girl. When she questioned the same, the petitioners threatened her with dire consequences. Therefore, she has given a complaint on 24.09.2014.
3. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence. The first petitioner's age is only 25 years. According to the defacto complainant, their marriage was solemnized before 6 years and at that time, the first petitioner was only 19 years and the defacto complainant was 31 years. In the year 2013, the first petitioner gave a complaint against the defacto complainant and two others stating that the defacto complainant and others have trespassed into the shop of the petitioners and damaged the articles. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the marriage between the first petitioner and the defacto complainant was solemnized before 6 years and the defacto complainant has given jewels and
amounts to the first petitioner and the petitioners 2 and 3 are arranging marriage for the first petitioner with another girl.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai District 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 first petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required and the petitioners 2 and 3 shall appear before the respondent police as and when required. The petitioners shall comply with the conditions 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/- 09/12/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MELUR.
2 DO THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI. 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MELUR, MADURAI DISTRICT. +1. CC to M/S S.SUKUMAR Advocate SR.No. 71033. TS/11.12.2015/2P-6C/NGM-SS/SAR - II
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.23347 of 2015 Date :09/12/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/