Petthu Naidu v. State Rep By
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Seventh day of February Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice A.M.BASHEER AHAMED CRL OP(MD) No.2044 of 2017 1 PETTHU NAIDU 2 KANJANA 3 BHUVANESWARI 4 GURUSAMY, ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED Nos.2 to 5 Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, KARAIKUDI IN KARAIKUDI NORTH POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.
(CR.NO.694 OF 2016) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.G.MARIMUTHU Advocate For Respondent : MR.P.Kandasamy 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 to 5, in Crime No.694 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 494, 498(A) IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and hence, seek anticipatory bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) for the respondent/State. 3.The learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) on instructions submitted that totally there are five accused in this case and the petitioners herein are arrayed as A-2 to A-5 respectively, who are in-laws of the defacto complainant. The first accused is the husband of the defacto complainant, who is still absconding in this case.
4. The case of the prosecution is that the marriage took place in the year 2005 between the first accused and the defacto complainant and the first accused is having female child through the defacto complainant and there is demand of 10 sovereigns of jewels and Rs. 1 lakh cash.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners states that the first accused has filed a divorce petition in H.M.O.P.No. 9 of 2015 and an exparte decree was obtained in the said proceedings. The first accused is residing at Srilanka and the petitioners herein have no previous case.
6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the petitioners are in-laws of the defacto complainant, this Court is 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 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi, and on each of them executing 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.
7.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/- 27/02/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KARAIKUDI 2 -DO-THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, KARAIKUDI IN KARAIKUDI NORTH POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.G.MARIMUTHU Advocate SR.No.11045 SM:PN:SAR I:28.02.2017:2p/6c
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.2044 of 2017 Date :27/02/2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/