L.Kanimozhi, v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Fifteenth day of November Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.15572 of 2017 1 L.KANIMOZHI 2 S.ALAMELU MANGAI ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED, A1,A2 Vs THE STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, PONMALAI, TRICHY DISTRICT CR.NO.14/2017 ... RESPONDENT / RESPONDENT For Petitioners : M/S.A.SENTHIL KUMAR Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294 (b), 323, 324 and 506(i) of IPC in Crime No.33 of 2017, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that there was wordy quarrel between the first petitioner and her husband and her mother-in-law. Thereby, the mother-in-law sustained injury and gave a complaint before the respondent police.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that due to the previous enmity the mother-in-law and husband of the first petitioner foisted the false complaint against the petitioners. Despite H.M.O.P.No.415 of 2016 for divorce filed by the husband of the first petitioner, the first petitioner is residing in the very same house. Aggrieved by the same the defacto complainant and the husband of the first petitioner foisted a false complaint against the petitioners.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent submitted that he did not dispute the facts submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

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

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners 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 No.V, Trichy District on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each 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 investigation officer, as and when required for interrogation on receipt of summon;

(ii) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (iii) the petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail;

(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 and the anticipatory bail granted stands cancelled automatically.

sd/- 15/11/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V, TRICHY DISTRICT. 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY DISTRICT. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, PONMALAI, TRICHY DISTRICT.

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.P.SESUBALAN RAJA Advocate SR.No.34441

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.15572 of 2017 Date :15/11/2017 MKV-PM-PN-SAR 1/21.11.2017/2P-6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/