Kanagaraj v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Second day of March Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.3643 of 2015 1 KANAGARAJ 2 MUTHUMARI 3 RAMALAKSHMI 4 BOOMINATHAN 5 KAMALAM 6 KATHIRESAN 7 GANESAN 8 SIVARANJANI ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 8 Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE IRUKKANKUDI POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.
CR.NO.87/2015 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.S.DEENADHAYALAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN, 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 an alleged offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 355, 343 r/w 109 IPC in Crime No. 87 of 2015 seek anticipatory bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent. The investigating Officer is also present.
3.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is practising Advocate. The allegation of the defacto complianant is that she was forced to get married to one Kanagaraj, the first petitioner herein by her own parents, who are the second and sixth petitioners. The defacto complainant has also made allegations against her own sisters, who are the petitioners 3 and 8.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners never committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police.
5. Taking into consideration the averments found in the complaint, 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, Sattur, on condition that each of the petitioner shall execute a bond for https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
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: [a] the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police 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]. The Inspector of Police concerned is directed to send a compliance report to the office of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) as to whether the petitioners are complying with the order or not.
sd/- 02/03/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO
1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SATTUR.
2.
-DO- THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUDHUNAGAR AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR.
3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE IRUKKANKUDI POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.
4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S.S.DEENADHAYALAN Advocate SR.No. 9787 SR : 03.03.2015 : 2P/6C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.3643 of 2015 Date :02/03/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/