A. Rejina Begum v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Second day of March Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.4993 of 2016 A. REJINA BEGUM ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT, CR NO. 1 OF 2016. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S S.KAMESWARAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.P.BALASUBRAMANI Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : MR.M.SUBASH BABU Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 420 I.P.C. and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in Crime No.1 of 2016 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 State.

3. It is seen that Jahankeer Alie (A.1) got married to the defacto complainant on 13.01.2013 and their marriage ran into rough weather. Jahankeer Alie is said to be living in Dubai. As far as this petitioner is concerned, she is the sister of Jahankeer Alie and she is married and living separately and is not in the joint family. Learned Counsel for the defacto complainant strongly objected.

4. Taking into consideration the nature of the allegations against the petitioner, this Court is 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 her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pudukkottai on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties 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 appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

[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 Judicial 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 Judicial 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].

(e) The Inspector of Police concerned, is directed to send compliance report to the office of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) whether the petitioner is complying with the order or not.

sd/- 22/03/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,PUDUKKOTTAI 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,PUDUKKOTTAI 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION,PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT 4 THE ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S S.KAMESWARAN Advocate SR.No.16127

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.4993 of 2016 Date :22/03/2016 AA/SKS-RR/AR-I/24.03.2016/2p-6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/