Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/8273/2015disposed of

Manjula Devi @ Devi @ Mari @ v. The Sub-Inspector Of Police

2015-04-30Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 30.04.2015

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM Crl.O.P(MD)No.8273 of 2015 Manjula devi @ Devi @ Mari @ Manjuvellaiammal : Petitioner -VsThe Sub Inspector of Police, Thuckalay Police Station, Kanniyakumari District. : Respondent PRAYER: Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to modify the conditin with regard to production of surety of husband or blood relative and cash deposit of Rs.5,000/- passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Padmanabhapuram, in Cr.M.P.No.2405 of 2015 dated 15.04.2015 and further direct the learned Judicial Magistrate, Padmanabhapuram to accept the competent and solvent sureties to be produced by the petitioner and pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of case. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For Respondent : Mr.A.P.Balasubramani Government Advocate (Criminal side)

O R D E R

This petition is filed to modify the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Padmanabhapuram, in Cr.M.P.No.2405 of 2015 dated 15.04.2015.

2.The petitioner was arrested on 15.03.2014 by the respondent for the alleged offences under sections 465, 468, 471 of IPC r/w. Section 12 (1)(a) of Passport Act.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was released on bail by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Padmanabhapuram, on 15.04.2015 on the condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- [Rupees Ten thousand only] with two sureties each for a like sum, in which one of the sureties was blood relative of the petitioner. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that she was not legally married and as such she will not be in a position to produce a surety of her blood relative.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) for the State.

5. Considering the nature of allegations, I am unable to agree with the contention of the petitioner. The learned Judicial Magistrate considering the submissions of the learned Government Advocate, has directed the petitioner to furnish two sureties and out of them, one shall be a solvent surety and one shall be a blood relative, either the husband of the accused or a blood relative of the accused along with their family card/I.D. Card. Hence, I do not find any reason to modify https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

the condition imposed by the learned Magistrate.

6. Hence, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /True Copy/ Sub- Assistant Registrar To, 1.The Sub Inspector of Police,Thuckalay Police Station, Kanniyakumari District.

2.The Judicial Magistrate, Padmanabhapuram 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1cc to M/s.P.GanapathiSubramanian, Advocate SR.No.24659/15 sm:13.05.2015:2P/5C ses Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8273 of 2015 30.04.2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/