Lawrance v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the First day of September Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.5625 of 2015 1 LAWRANCE 2 ALPHONSA 3 JENIBHA 4 ANTRO 5 VIMALARANI 6 JACKULIN ..PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 to 6 Vs.

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, COLACHEL, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

CR. NO. 8/2015.

..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.R.RUSSEL RAJ Advocate For Respondent : M/s.S.PRABHA, 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, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 498(A) and 406 of I.P.C., and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in Crime No.8 of 2015 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 and also harassed the de-facto complainant. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that as per direction of this Court, the first petitioner has appeared before the respondent police on 24.08.2015 and 27.08.2015 and on both the occasions, the de-facto complainant did not turn up.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioners filed an affidavit of the first petitioner stating that the petitioner is ready to deposit a sum of Rs.7 lakhs in the name of his minor daughter viz.,Lavanya Jesuly and a sum of Rs.3 lakhs in the name of the de-facto complainant towards their maintenance, without prejudice to his rights to defend the case filed by them.

5.Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side).

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, Eraniel, Kanyakumari 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 production of deposit receipts for total sum of Rs.10,00,000/-(Rupees ten lakhs only) in the name of his wife and daughter as per the affidavit in a Nationalized Bank at Colachel and on further condition that the first petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., for a period of one week and the petitioners No.2 to 6 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/- 01/09/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERANIEL, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT. 2 -do-thro'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KANAYAKUMARI AT NAGERCOIL. 3 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, COLACHEL, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

+1. CC to M/S.R.RUSSEL RAJ Advocate SR.No.50766 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.5625 of 2015 Date :01/09/2015 PBK/GSV-PM/SAR-II 03/09/2015 ::2P-6C::

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/