Backiaraj v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Dated: 16/02/2022 PRESENT The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN 1.Backiaraj 2.Kanimozhi 3.Muthukumar 4.Prema ... Petitioners/Accused (Rank not known) Vs.
State rep. By The Inspector of Police, Mayanoor Police Station, Karur District.
(Crime No.585 of 2021) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : M/s.C.JEYA INDRA PATEL, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.M.VAIKKAM KARUNANITHI Government Advocate (Crl.side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.585 of 2021 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order:- The petitioners, who are arrayed as accused persons apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under section 174 Cr.P.C @ 498(A) and 304(B) IPC, in Crime No.585 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The petitioners are facing the charges for the offence under section 174 Cr.P.C @ 498(A) and 304(B) IPC.
3.Heard both sides.
4.This matter is posted today under the caption 'for orders'. For the purpose of production of CD file, the matter got periodically adjourned. Now the CD file has been produced and perused.
5.Perusal of the CD file shows that some sort of dispute arose between the husband and wife over selling the property to the first petitioner. Subsequent to the sale of the property, the deceased along with A1 was residing in the upstairs portion of the house and A1 family was residing in the ground portion. Because of selling of 1/3
the property, it appears that some sort of trouble arose between the husband and wife and that continued. A1 was without any job. So there was pressure on the the part of the deceased to A1 go and seek a job and that was not properly attended by him, that was not liked by the deceased. On the date of occurrence and some sort of trouble arose between the husband and wife, over bad food that was fed to the child. Because of the above said food, at night, the child was vomiting and that was the reason for the trouble between them and A1 alleged to have stated that the deceased may go out. After that A1 went away, on the same day night, the deceased committed suicide. 6.RDO report shows that because of the continuos demand of money by the accused persons, the deceased appears to have committed suicide.
But however from the perusal of the CD file, it appears that these petitioners are no way connected with the dispute between the husband and wife. These petitioners have been implicated on the ground of sale of the property to the petitioners by A1. Now, A1 was arrested and later released on bail after 24 days of judicial custody.
7.Considering the role that has been played by the petitioners, 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 learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Krishnarayapuram, Karur District and on each of them executing 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 shall appear before the respondent police once in a week at 10.00 a.m. until further orders and the 2nd petitioner, being the Government School Teacher, shall appear before the respondent police once in a week I.e., on Sunday at 10.
00 am until further orders. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. 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 will stand dismissed.
sd/- 16/02/2022 / TRUE COPY / / /2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
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.
2/3
TO 1 THE DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KRISHNARAYAPURAM, KARUR DISTRICT.
2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KARUR DISTRICT.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAYANOOR POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.16748 of 2021 Date :16/02/2022 SA/PN/SAR.1/22.02.2022/3P/5C 3/3