Sowndari v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twelfth day of September Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD) No.16108 of 2018 SOWNDARI ... PETITIONER / SOLE ACCUSED Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATHUR POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO.93/2018) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : Mr.S.DEENADHAYALAN Advocate For Respondent : Mr.V.NEELAKANDAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner is in judicial custody since 02.08.2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 379 IPC, in Crime No.93 of 2018 on the file of the respondent police. She seeks bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the deceased were working in the Agricultural Department, Collectorate, Pudukkottai. The petitioner is a subordinate to the deceased. While being so, the petitioner had illicit relationship with the deceased, since the petitioner is a widow. On 27.07.2018, while they were returning from the office at about 5.30 p.m., one unknown person stabbed the deceased and ran away. Thereafter, the petitioner snatched a chain from the deceased body.

After receiving the deceased body, it was informed to the wife of the deceased and the complaint has been lodged as against the petitioner. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that even as per the confession statement, she has no overt act, except allegation of snatched chain from the deceased body. Further, he submitted that the petitioner is incarcerated from 02.08.2018 and is being a lady. He would submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and she has been falsely implicated in this case.

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

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioner had illegal intimacy with the deceased and also she borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- from the deceased. Due to that motive, she engaged some persons and murdered the deceased on 27.7.2018, while they were returning from office to their home. Therefore, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5.Considering the above facts and circumstances and even as per the confession statement of the petitioner that one unknown person stabbed him, due to which, he died and also considering the period of incarceration of the petitioner from 02.08.2018, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to the following conditions:

(i) the petitioner shall execute 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 Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur.

(ii)the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

sd/- 12/09/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KEERANUR.

THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PUDUKKOTTAI.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATHUR POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT.

4 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, SPECIAL PRISON FOR WOMEN, TRICHY.

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

+1. CC to M/S.S.DEENADHAYALAN Advocate SR.No.17433 PS/MMS/SAR-1:12/09/2018:2P/7C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.16108 of 2018 Date :12/09/2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/