Thilagam v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 21/11/2022 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice A.A.NAKKIRAN CRL OP(MD). No.14283 of 2022

1. Thilagam

2. Karunakaran

3. Sathiya

4. Sathish ... Petitioners/Accused No.3 to 6 Vs State rep.by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Jeeyapuram Police Station, Trichy District.

(Crime No.19/2022) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : M/s.Sakkarapani V, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Criminal Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.19/2022 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A3 to A6, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294 (b), 498(A), 354 and 506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in Crime No.19 of 2022, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the marriage was taken place between the defacto complainant and the first accused on

12.02.2020. After marriage, the accused persons harassed the defacto complainant by demanding additional dowry. Therefore, she left the matrimonial home on 24.03.2021. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the first accused is the husband of the defacto complainant and the petitioners 1 to 3 are in-laws of the defacto complainant and the fourth petitioner is the husband of the third petitioner. There was no harassment or cruelty as alleged by the prosecution. Only with a view to harass the petitioners, a false case has been foisted against them. He would further submit that the petitioners are innocents and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, they may be granted anticipatory bail. 4.The learned Government Advocate(crl.

Side) would submit that it is a matrimonial dispute. Due to continuos harassment of the accused persons, this complaint was lodged by the defacto complainant and there is a specific allegation levelled against the petitioners. He would further submit that investigation is not yet completed. Hence, he opposed to grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of offence and also the facts that it is a matrimonial dispute and the petitioners 1 to 3 are in-laws of the defacto complainant and the fourth respondent is the husband of the third petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest or their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli, on condition that the petitioners shall execute 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 respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:

(a)the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b)the petitioners 1 and 2 shall report before the Inspector of Police, Valavanur Police Station, Villupuram and the petitioners 3 and 4 shall report before the Inspector of Police, Velachery Police Station, Chennai, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. (c)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(d)the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(e)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 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]; and;

(f)if the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

Sd/- 21/11/2022 / TRUE COPY / /11/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.III) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

CP TO

1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ADDITIONAL MAHILA COURT, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI.

2. -DO- THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI DISTRICT.

3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, JEEYAPURAM POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT.

4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VALAVANUR POLICE STATION, VILLUPURAM.

5. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VELACHERY POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

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

+1. CC to M/S.R.ILAYARAJA, Advocate SR.No.13407

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.14283 of 2022 Date :21/11/2022 SP/BUC/SAR III/30/11/2022/3P/8C