R.Manoharan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Eighth day of July Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.9185 of 2015 1 R.MANOHARAN 2 R.THANGAMMAL 3 P.MAHESWARI 4 PARAMAN ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4 Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, TIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO. 46/2015) ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.B.CHANDRAMOHAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.K.V.RAJARAJAN, 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 A1 to A4 , in Crime No.46 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 498(A) and 506(i) IPC and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

2.According to the defacto complainant, the accused have harassed her by demanding dowry and also threatened her with dire consequences.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the first petitioner had already filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.416 of 2015 against the defacto complainant before the Family Court, Madurai seeking restitution of conjugal rights and the first petitioner is ready for re-union. However, the defacto complainant with the ill advice of her parents lodged this false complaint implicating all the family members in this case. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned counsel further submitted that as per the direction of this court, the first petitioner has appeared before the Mediation on three occasions, but the defacto complainant did not appear before Mediation.

5.The learned Government Advocate also submitted that the defacto complainant has not appeared before Mediation as per the direction of this Court.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thirumangalam, and on each of them executing a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum to the satisfaction to the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the first petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required and the petitioners 2 to 4 shall appear before the respondent police as and when required. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously.

6. The petitioners shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

sd/- 08/07/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUMANGALAM 2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT 3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, TIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT RL/5 C- 13/7/2015

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9185 of 2015 Date :08/07/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/