Jeyakodi, v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Fifteenth day of July Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.11789 of 2016 1 JEYAKODI 2 JOTHI @ NAGA JOTHI 3 KALAIVANI 4 DEVI ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No.2,3,5 and 6 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, NILAKOTTAI, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

IN CR.NO.12 OF 2016 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S A.ARUL JENIFER Advocate For Respondent : MR.P.KANNITHEVAN, Govt. 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.2,3,5 & 6, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406 of IPC, in Crime No.12 of 2016, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the marriage between the de facto complainant and A.1 was solemnized on 06.12.2015. After the marriage, the accused persons harassed the de facto complainant by demanding more dowry. On complaint, case has been registered for the above said offences.

3.The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and the petitioners are in-laws of the defacto complainant. A1 filed H.M.O.P.No.61 of 2016 for Restitution of Conjugal rights. After receiving summons only, she has given a false complaint against the petitioners and other accused.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent submitted that these petitioners and other accused demanded more dowry and tortured the defacto complainant. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that these petitioners are in-laws of the defacto

complainant, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, they 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, Nilakottai, on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute 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 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.

(ii)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. (iii)the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

(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 as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

sd/- 15/07/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NILAKOTTAI.

2 DO THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

3 THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, NILAKOTTAI, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

+1. CC to M/S A.ARUL JENIFER Advocate SR.No.36894.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.11789 of 2016 Date :15/07/2016 AM/SK.SKN/SAR-II/22.07.2016/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/