Harish v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Fifth day of January Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.18019 of 2017 HARISH ... PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED Vs 1 THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE R.S.MANGALAM POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT (CRIME NO. 256 OF 2017) ...1ST RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 2 MUNIYASAMY ... 2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.P.MUTHUSAMY Advocate For 1ST Respondent : MR.A.ROBINSON, Government Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner who is arrayed as A1, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offence punishable under Sections 363 and 420 of IPC., in Crime No.256 of 2017 on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that one Packiyalakshmi, namely the daughter of the defacto complainant was missing on 26.11.2017.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and hence, pleads for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) submitted that the victim girl has been secured.

5.The submissions made on either side are considered. As of now, the girl who have been alleged to be kidnapped by the petitioner was secured and thereafter, according to her will, she was handed over to her father. So, in order to complete the investigation custodial interrogation is not necessary. Further, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

in this regard, this Court already granted interim anticipatory bail to this petitioner as per the order passed in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.18019 of 2017 dated 28.12.2017 6.Taking all the above said aspects into consideration and having regard to the nature of offence, this Court comes to the conclusion that in order to complete the investigation, custodial interrogation is not necessary. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to made absolute the interim anticipatory bail already granted in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. The earlier Anticipatory Bail order passed in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.18019 of 2017 is made absolute.

sd/- 25/01/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, TM/MM Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE DISTRICT MUNSIF AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUVADANAI.

2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE R.S.MANGALAM POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.P.MUTHUSAMY Advocate SR.No.1503 GJM/RR/SAR-2-1.2.18-2P-6C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.18019 of 2017 Date :25/01/2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/