Jegan v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the First day of March Two Thousand and Twenty Four PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI 1 JEGAN 2 PRIYA ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED Nos. 1 & 2 Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE NITHRAVILAI POLICE STATION, KANNIYAKUMARI DISTRICT.
IN CRIME NO.31 OF 2024.
... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MR.A.PRABHU SELVA KUMAR, Advocate For Respondent : MR.S.MANIKANDAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. PRAYER:
FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRIME NO.31 OF 2024 ON THE FILE OF THE RESPONDENT POLICE.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 323 and 506(i) IPC and Section 75 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, in Crime No.31 of 2024, seek anticipatory bail. 1/3
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the mother of the second petitioner and the second petitioner married one Kumar and is having three male children and one female child. Within two years of marriage, the second petitioner's husband went to abroad and thereafter, the second petitioner had developed illegal intimacy with several persons. While so, the grandchildren of the defacto complainant informed her that they had been subjected to torture and strip off their dress and kneel over salt by the petitioners. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case and the first petitioner is the relative of the second petitioner and they are friends and there is no illegal relationship between the petitioners. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent Police submitted that the second petitioner has filed a Habeas Corpus Petition before this Court, seeking custody of the children, however, this Court refused to grant the custody of the children to the second petitioner, considering the harassment made by her to the children.
5. It appears that the second petitioner in collusion with the first petitioner had tortured the children and subjected them to strip off their dress and kneel over salt 2/3
and the harassment made by the petitioners to the children is untolerable. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the serious allegation levelled against the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 01/03/2024 / TRUE COPY / /03/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.I /II /III /IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
SSB TO THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE NITHRAVILAI POLICE STATION, KANNIYAKUMARI DISTRICT.
THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN Date :01/03/2024 PKP/GS/SAR /18.03.2024/ 3P/ 3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 3/3