Fathima v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Fourth day of July Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN CRL OP(MD) No.12663 of 2018 1 FATHIMA 2 S. RAJA ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1, 9 Vs STATE REPRESENT THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THOOTHUKUDI SIPCOT POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioners : M/S.HENRI TIPHAGNE Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.ROBINSON, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 341 and 506(ii) of I.P.C., Section 3 of Tamil Nadu Public Property(Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act,1992, and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.140 of 2018, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. It appears that the petitioners had earlier moved the learned Sessions Judge and obtained anticipatory bail. But then, for certain reasons they could not surrender and execute the sureties.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners stated that due to several subsequent developments that had taken place, they were not in a position to surrender. He would point out that the first petitioner is a genuine social activist and that she has been falsely implicated.

4. Taking into account all these aspects, 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 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Thoothukudi, and executing a bond each of them for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two common sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the conditions stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously.

5. The petitioners 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 shall stand dismissed.

6. It is further directed that if the petitioners herein are to be implicated in other cases in connection with Sterlite incidents, the respondent police shall notify the petitioners by issuing summons in terms of Section 41(A) of Cr.P.C., so that the petitioners will have breathing time to approach this Court for anticipatory bail.

sd/- 24/07/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.III, THOOTHUKUDI 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THOOTHUKUDI SIPCOT POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.HENRI TIPHAGNE Advocate SR.No.13814

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.12663 of 2018 Date :24/07/2018 SMA/RR/SAR-4/30.07.2018:2P/6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/