Aathirayammal v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Third day of October Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.14099 of 2017 1 AATHIRAYAMMAL 2 SHAMRATH BEGAM 3 ABU @ AYISHA GANI 4 AYISHAMMAL ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No.2 to 5 Vs THE STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MANAPPARAI, TRICHY DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO.10 OF 2017) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioners : M/S.K.KEVINKARAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN, 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 Nos.2 to 5 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act in Crime No.10 of 2017, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant Sayira Banu married with first accused and the petitioners before this Court are in-laws and family members of the first accused. There was a family dispute out of which first accused used filthy language at the time of bangle function. Thereby, the defacto complainant sustained simple injuries. Accordingly, she lodged a complaint against the husband and other family members.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that all the petitioners are women and family members of the defacto complainant as well as the first accused and they are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the State submitted that Women Harassment Act was imposed against A1 and he strongly opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) that Women Harassment Act was imposed only against A1, I am 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, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Manaparai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

(i) the petitioners shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation;

(ii) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. (iii) the petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail;

(iv) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law and the anticipatory bail granted stands cancelled automatically.

sd/- 23/10/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MANAPARAI, TRICHY 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,TRICHY 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MANAPPARAI, TRICHY DISTRICT. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.14099 of 2017 Date :23/10/2017 PK/RR-BS/SAR-3/26.10.2017 : 2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/