Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/5653/2015disposed of

B. Ramar v. The Inspector Of Police

2015-03-31Honourable Mr Justice P. N. Prakash2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Thirty First day of March Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.5653 of 2015 1 B. RAMAR 2 B. RAJA 3 V. VEERAVALLI 4 B. SARASU 5 A. NAGAVALLI 6 KARPAGAVALLI 7 R. AMBIGA ..PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1,2,4 to 8 Vs.

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE MANDALAMANICKAM POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

RIME NO.2/2015 ..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.V.PERUMAL Advocate For Respondent : Mr.A.P.BALASUBRAMANI, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 21.01.2015 (A-1), 22.01.2015 (A-2 and A-4) and 24.01.2015 (A-5 to A-8) for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324 and 302 IPC in Crime No.2 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) for the respondent.

3. It is seen that A-3 was having illicit intimacy with the deceased, pursuant to which, it is alleged that all these petitioners attacked the deceased and caused her death.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the petition as against the first and second petitioners herein/A-1 and A-2 and he has also made an endorsement to that effect.

5. As regards the petitioners 3 to 7, they being ladies and there are no previous cases against them, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to grant bail to them.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners 3 to 7 are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a separate 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 District Munsif/Judicial Magistrate, Kamuthi, and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioners 3 to 7 shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

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

[b] the petitioners 3 to 7 shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[c] the petitioners 3 to 7 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 3 to 7 in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 3 to 7 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].

7. Insofar as the petitioners 1 and 2 herein are concerned, the petition seeking bail stands dismissed as withdrawn. sd/- 31/03/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRTE, KAMUTHI, RAMANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

2 -DO-THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM. 3 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI. 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANDALAMANICKAM POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

5 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY. 6 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, PRAMAKUDI SUB JAIL, PARAMAKUDI. 7 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, RAMNAD SUB JAIL, RAMANATHAPURAM. +1. CC to M/S.V.PERUMAL Advocate SR.No.15870 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.5653 of 2015 Date :31/03/2015 PBK 31/03/2015 ::2P-9C:

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