Umamaheswari v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Eighth day of April Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.8140 of 2015 UMAMAHESWARI ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.3 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KENIKARAI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DIST.

CRIME NO. 280 OF 2014.

... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.R.R.KANNAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as A-3 in Crime No.280 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police was arrested and remanded to the judicial custody by the respondent police on 26.03.2015 for the alleged offence under Section 302 I.P.C @ 342 and 302 I.P.C and hence seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Bhavani, who is the daughter of the petitioner fell in love with one Sathish Kumar and in spite of objection by the petitioner and his son/A-1, the marriage was solemnised . Since the deceased Bhavani's husband had gone to Malasiya for employment, the deceased lived along with her two children along with the petitioner. Thereafter, the deceased quarrelled with the petitioner and left her two children in the custody of the petitioner stating that she is going to live along with her mother-in-law. Subsequently, the deceased is said to have developed intimacy with some other person and started living with him. On 21.06.2014, at 9.00 p.m., the deceased came to the house of the petitioner, where there was a quarrel arose between them and in a fit of anger, A-1 attacked the deceased with aruval and thereby caused the death of the deceased.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that originally a case was registered against the son of the petitioner namely Dinesh/A-1 and after obtaining further statement from the husband of the deceased, the other accused 2 to 4 have been implicated in this case. He further submitted that even as per the prosecution, the petitioner caught hold of the legs of the deceased at the time of occurrence. He further submitted that the petitioner is an innocent lady and she has been falsely implicated in this case.

4. Heard the learned Government Adocate(Crl. Side) for the State. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5. Considering the above said fact, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail on the following conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on 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 No.II, Ramanahapuram, and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m until further orders. sd/- 28/04/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II,RAMANATHAPURAM. 2.DO THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE RAMANATHAPURAM. 3.THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4.THE OFFICER INCHARGE, PARAMAKUDI SUB-JAIL FOR WOMEN, PARAMAKUDI, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT. 5.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KENIKARAI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DIST. +1. CC to M/S.R.R.KANNAN Advocate SR.No.22741

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.8140 of 2015 Date :28/04/2015 rg.28.04.2015 2p.7c.

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