Venkatesh v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Ninth day of March Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.5380 of 2016 VENKATESH ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED No.1 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, SATTUR, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO. 18 OF 2015) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S S.MUTHALRAJ Advocate For Respondent : MR.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, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 506(i) of I.P.C. and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act in Crime No.18 of 2015 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).

3. This is the second application for anticipatory bail and the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.23662 of 2015, on 14.12.2015 on condition that he should furnish sureties within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order, failing which, the anticipatory bail application stands cancelled. Now he filed affidavit assigning the reasons for not furnishing the sureties.

4. Accepting the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, 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 his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sattur, Virudhunagar District on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

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 10.00 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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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/- 29/03/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRAE, SATTUR.

2 DO THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUTHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

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

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, SATTUR, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

+1. CC to M/S S.MUTHALRAJ Advocate SR.No.17384.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.5380 of 2016 Date :29/03/2016 AM/AAL.MPA/AR-I/31.03.2016/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/