Paraman v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Eleventh day of June Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.9222 of 2015 1 PARAMAN 2 JOTHI ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 4 Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMAN POLICE STATION, OTTANCHATHIRAM, DINDIUGL DISTRICT, (CRIME NO.2 OF 2014). ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.M.PITCHAI MUTHU Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN 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 and A4, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406, 294(b) and 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act in Crime No.2 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused have demanded dowry from the defacto complainant and they were harassing the defacto complainant.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the defacto complainant left matrimonial home in the year 2012 itself and thereafter the husband has filed a petition for divorce in H.M.O.P.No.194 of 2012 before the Sub Court, Dindigul, which was not contested by the defacto complainant. The learned counsel further submitted that an ex-parte decree was passed in H.M.O.P.No.194 of 2012 and the defacto complainant has not taken any steps to set aside the ex-parte decree. The learned counsel further submitted that due to matrimonial dispute a false compliant was given against all the family members and the petitioners are husband and sisterin-law of the defacto complainant. 4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) submitted that the respondent police have completed the investigation and laid charge sheet in this case on 01.05.2015.

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

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ottanchathiram, Dindigul District, on each of them executing a separate 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 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 second petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously.

7. The petitioner 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/- 11/06/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,OTTANCHATHIRAM, DINDIGUL DISTRICT 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,DINDIGUL DISTRICT 3 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMAN POLICE STATION, OTTANCHATHIRAM, DINDIUGL DISTRICT.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9222 of 2015 Date :11/06/2015 AA/16.06.2015/ 2p- 5c/ https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/