Prince Stanley v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30/11/2022 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice A.A.NAKKIRAN Prince Stanley ... Petitioner/Accused No.3 Vs The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District.
(Crime No.18/2022).
... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.Venkatesan P, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.18/2022 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A3, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 417, 376 and 506(ii) IPC and Section 4 of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 in Crime No.18 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that A1 was in love affair with the de-facto complainant and had physical relationship with her and thereafter, refused to marry her. When the same was questioned by the de-facto complainant, the petitioner and other accused threatened her with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and the co1/3
accused was already granted anticipatory bail by this Court. Further, the petitioner shall abide any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for anticipatory bail. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit that A1 by giving false promise to marry the de-facto complainant, had sexual intercourse with her and thereafter, refused to marry her. When the same was questioned by the de-facto complainant, the petitioner threatened her with dire consequences. He would further submit that the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C of the defacto complainant is also recorded and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner and also the fact that co-accused was already granted anticipatory bail, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar, on condition that 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 Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:
[a]the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity.
[b]the petitioner shall report before respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;
[c]the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[d]the petitioner 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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]. 2/3
[f]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.
sd/- 30/11/2022 / TRUE COPY / /12/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO
1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, VIRUDHUNAGAR.
2. DO-THROUGH : THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR.
3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, VALLIYOOR, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.
4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.21194 of 2022 Date :30/11/2022 cp USK/VR/SAR-I/15.12.2022/3P/5C 3/3