Papathi @ Vijayalakshmi v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty First day of April Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) Nos.6696 & 6697 of 2015 PAPATHI @ VIJAYALAKSHMI ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN IN CRLOP(MD)NO.6696/2015 GOWRI ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 IN CRL OP(MD)NO.6697/2015 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VEDACHANDUR POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.
(CR. NO. 381/2014) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT IN BOTH PETITIONS FOR PETITIONER : M/S.R.UDHAYAKUMAR ADVOCATE IN CRL OP(MD)NO.6696/15 FOR PETITIONER : M/S.T.LENINKUMAR ADVOCATE IN CRL OP(MD)NO.6697/15 For Respondent : MR.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) IN BOTH PETITIONS PETITIONS FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner in both the Criminal Original Petitions, who are arrayed as A-1 and A-2 respectively, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Section 174 Cr.P.C @ 306 I.P.C in Crime No.381 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on 25.12.2014, the accused had assaulted the mother of the defacto complainant with broom and again on 26.12.2014, they scolded her and also threatened her and therefore, she committed suicide.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the son of the first accused and the son of the deceased are very close friends and the deceased had illicit intimacy with one Nagappan. Due to the misunderstanding between the sons of the deceased and the first accused, the deceased had informed Nagappan and therefore, on 16.12.2014, he came in a two wheeler and dashed against the two wheeler of the son of the first accused. For which, a criminal case has been registered in Crime https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ No.374 of 2014. It is further submitted that on the date of occurrence
i.e., on 26.12.2014, the defacto complainant had quarrelled with the deceased, which lead to suicide and the petitioners are no way responsible for that.
4. Heard the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) for the State. 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, Vedachandur, Dindigul District and the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Vedasanthur, Dindigul District respectively, 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 petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., until further orders. The petitioners shall comply with the condition 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/- 21/04/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VEDACHANDUR,DINDIGUL DISTRICT. 2 DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,DINDIGUL. 3 THE DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VEDASANTHUR,DINDIGUL DISTRICT.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VEDACHANDUR POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S.R.UDHAYAKUMAR Advocate SR.No.20572 +1. CC to M/S.T.LENINKUMAR Advocate SR.No.20682 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) Nos.6696 & 6697 of 2015 Date :21/04/2015 PA/23.04.2015/2P/8C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/