Ramesh v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 11/12/2020 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD). No.14614 of 2020

1. Ramesh

2. Mariyammal ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 Vs The State rep by Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Palani, Crime No.21/2020, Dindigul District.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners: M/s.K.Balasubramani, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.21/2020 on the file of the Respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent.

2. The petitioners apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 498(A) and 406 of I.P.C. and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in Crime No.21 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the marriage between the first petitioner and the defacto complainant was solemnized on 29.09.2018. The petitioner was jobless and he is not having own house. Hence, he demanded dowry from the defacto complainant. Hence, a case has been registered.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the defacto complainant was sent out of the matrimonial house in the month of January 2019. Thereafter, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint and the same was enquired into and during mediation, the defacto complainant was asked to live with the first petitioner in a separate house. Since, the defacto complainant denied the same, the first petitioner filed divorce petition. Hence, a false complaint has been foisted against the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that it is a matrimonial issue and the petitioners demanded dowry from the defacto complainant's family.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palani, and 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 respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition 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 first petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation. The second petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

(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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

sd/- 11.12.2020 / TRUE COPY / / /2020 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

IAS Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

TO

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Palani.

2. Do-Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dindugal District.

3. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Palani, Dindigul District..

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14614 of 2020 Date : 11/12/2020 VB RSK SAR 2 (17.12.2020) 3P 5C