Karuppasamy v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Fourth day of April Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.7861 of 2015 1 KARUPPASAMY 2 SELVAM 3 LAKSHMI ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 2,3 & 5 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MANAMADURAI, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.
CRIME NO.12/2015 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MR.R.VENKATESHWAR, Advocate for M/S.JACOB AND JACOB ASSOCIATES For Respondent : M/S.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as A2, A3 and A5 in Crime No.12 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 08.04.2015 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and 506(ii) of IPC and hence, seek bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the Accused Nos.1, 6 and 7 waylaid the daughter of de facto complaint on 29.03.2015 and compelled her to marry the first accused and also subsequently threatened the daughter of de facto complainant with dire consequences.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are parents and brother of the first accused and the de facto complainant is close relative of the petitioners. It is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ further submitted that, from the year 2012 the daughter of de facto complainant had fallen in love with first accused and they loved
each other and wanted to marry. Since the de facto complainant is a minor, it was postponed. Now, due to family dispute, the false complaint given against the petitioners.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit that the accused 1,6 and 7 were not arrested so far and the petitioners are parents and brother of the first accused. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the allegations are made only against the A1, A6 and A7, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail 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 Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai and on further condition that the petitioners 1 and 2 shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders and the third petitioner shall appear before the respondent Police as and when required for interrogation.
sd/- 24/04/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MANAMADURAI, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT. 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGANGAI. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MANAMADURAI, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.
4 THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, SUB-JAIL, SIVAGANGAI. 5 THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, SUB-JAIL, PARAMAKUDI. 6 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S.JACOB AND JACOB ASSOCIATES, Advocate SR.No.21997 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.7861 of 2015 Date :24/04/2015 msm 24.04.2015 p2/8c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/