W.Rakshal Vanitha Rani v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Seventeenth day of May Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.V.MURALIDARAN CRL OP(MD) No.5961 of 2017 W.RAKSHAL VANITHA RANI ... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.2 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT (CRIME NO. 19 OF 2017) ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.J.LAWRANCE Advocate For Respondent : M/S.A.P.BALASUBRAMANI, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner / accused no.2, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offence punishable under Sections 6 and 21(1) of the Prohibition of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 in Crime No.19 of 2017, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent Police. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is no way connected with the alleged offence and he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that investigation is yet to be completed and hence, he opposed for granting anticipatory bail.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the gravity of offence said to have been committed by the petitioner, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Additional Sessions Court (Mahila Court), Dindigul, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [a]the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of one week and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[b]the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[c]the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[d]on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate / Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate / Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala (2005 AIR SCW 5560). sd/- 17/05/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, (MAHILA COURT), DINDIGUL.

2. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

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

+1. CC to M/S.J.LAWRANCE Advocate SR.No.22311

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.5961 of 2017 Date :17/05/2017 MS/KKR/SAR.3/22.05.2017/2P.5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/