Selvaraj v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Sixth day of June Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.8606 of 2016 1 SELVARAJ 2 ALPHONSA MARRY ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED no. 4 & 5 Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, THIRUVADANAI, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.
CR.NO. 10 OF 2015 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S T.ANTONY ARUL RAJ Advocate For Respondent : MR.P.KANNTHEVAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who is arrayed as accused Nos.4 & 5, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 294(b), 323, 506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in Crime No.10 of 2015, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the daughter of the defacto complainant was married to A3 and after the marriage, the accused persons threatened the daughter of the defacto complainant and received a total sum of Rs.10,00,000/-. The third accused and the daughter of the defacto complainant have got divorce by coercion. On complaint, the case has been registered for the above said offences.
3.The case of the petitioner is that the first petitioner is the maternal uncle of A3 and the second petitioner is the wife of the first petitioner. The name of the petitioners are not mentioned in the FIR and no complaint is given against the petitioners, while so, the respondent police searching for them. The petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) submitted that the name of the petitioners are not mentioned in the FIR and on investigation, they found that the petitioners also committed an offence and charge-sheet is filed against the petitioners. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that in the FIR there is no specific allegation made against the petitioners and they are the relatives of A3 and charge-sheet is filed, 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, Thiruvadanai 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 petitioner shall appear before the Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvadanai on receiving summons from the Court, without fail. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously.
6. The petitioner 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/- 06/06/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,THIRUVADANAI 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,RAMANATHAPURAM 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION,THIRUVADANAI,RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT. 4 THE ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S T.ANTONY ARUL RAJ Advocate SR.No.28081
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.8606 of 2016 Date :06/06/2016 AA/DB/SAR-II/07.06.2016/2p-6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/