M.Mariyammal v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Eighth day of June Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice A.M.BASHEER AHAMED CRL MP(MD) No.9408 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) No.9164 of 2017 M.MARIYAMMAL ... PETITIONER / DEFACTO COMPLAINANT Vs 1 THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EAST POLICE STATION, KOVILPATTI, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT, CR NO.406/2017.
... 1ST RESPONDENT / RESPONDENT 2 MANJULA ... 2ND RESPONDENT / PETITIONER Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to cancel the Anticipatory bail granted to the 2nd respondent / Petitioner in Crl. O. P. (MD) NO. 9164/2017 dated 19.07.2017 on the file of the Honourable Court.
Order: This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.R.PON KARTHIKEYAN, Advocate for the petitioner and of Mr.M.ASOKAN, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 and of Mr.V.KATHIRVEL, Senior Counsel for Mr.K.PRABHU Advocate for R2 the court made the following order:- Counsel for the petitioner / defacto complainant and the counsel for the 2nd respondent / accused are present. Learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the 1st respondent is also present. The accused and her mother are also present, as directed by this Court, in its order, dated 19.06.2018.
2. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondent states that there is no progress in the investigation, since the accused did not comply the condition imposed by this Court even after serving summons upon the mother of the accused.
3. The mother of the accused states that the accused was not present in the house at the time of serving the summons, since she was at Chennai and so, she has given her Mobile number to the Police, as requested by the Police, for contacting the accused for her appearance to some other date.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
4. Regarding handing over the jewels and cash to the Police, as contended by the accused, the learned Government Advocate (crl.side), on instruction, denied it and there is no proof at all for receipt of jewels or cash, as claimed by the accused. The first respondent has not taken any steps for cancellation of bail for noncompliance of condition imposed in the anticipatory bail petition.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner agreed that, if the accused is directed to appear on specified date before the concerned Police for investigation, the petitioner is not insisting to cancel the anticipatory bail already granted to the accused. The accused is a female and also aged about 18 years.
6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands dismissed with a direction to the accused to appear before the respondent Police, weekly once ie., on every Friday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders, by modifying the condition already imposed in her anticipatory bail petition.
sd/- 28/06/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, KOVILPATTI. 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EAST POLICE STATION, KOVILPATTI, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to Mr.K.PRABHU, Advocate SR.No.11598.
ORDER
IN CRL MP(MD) No.9408 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) No.9164 of 2017 Date :28/06/2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ SDS/MMS/ASVM/02.07.2018/2P/6C