Petchimuthu v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Nineteenth day of January Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.890 of 2016 1 PETCHIMUTHU 2 PARAVEL ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 2 & 3 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE AYAKUDI POLICE STATION, PALANI, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

CR NO. 426 OF 2015. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioners : M/S D.SELVARAJ Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as accused nos. 2 and 3 were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.01.2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 174 of Cr.P.C @ 306 of IPC in Crime No.426 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant's husband consumed poison on 28.12.2015 at his agriculture field and his second son-in-law had taken him to the hospital and the deceased informed him that due the stomach pain, he took poison. Subsequent to the investigation, it was found that the first petitioner who is the first son-in-law of the deceased and the petitioners 2 and 3 who are the sisters of the first petitioner demanded more dowry and informed the deceased that he is going to marry again with another lady who is bringing him more dowry. On hearing this, the deceased consumed poison.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the the first petitioner is the father of A1 and the second petitioner is maternal uncle of A1. Due to matrimonial dispute, the first accused and his wife were living separately and the petitioners are no way connected with the prosecution case.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that the petitioners and others harassed the daughter of the deceased and

the deceased tried to compromise the matter. But, the petitioners and others instigated him and due to that consumed poison and died and the investigation is pending. He further submitted that co-accused were granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.O.P(MD).No.555 of 2016, dated 12.01.2016.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the co-accused were already granted anticipatory bail, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palani and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent Police daily at 10.00 am until further orders. sd/- 19/01/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PALANI.

2 -DO- THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE DINDIGUL.

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

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE AYAKUDI POLICE STATION, PALANI, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, SUB-JAIL, PALANI.

+1. CC to M/S D.SELVARAJ Advocate SR.No.2822 akm/19.01.2016/ 2p- 7c/MP/PM/SAR-II

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.890 of 2016 Date :19/01/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/