BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Eleventh day of August Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT THE HON`BLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.8579 of 2011 1. M.TAMILARASAN, 2. MUNIASAMY, 3. MADHIRAJ, ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1,2 & 3 Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SANKARANKOVIL TOWN POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI, CR.NO.423/2011. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. M.SELVARAJ Advocate For Respondent : A.RAMAR, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners/Accused No.1, 2 and 3 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 341, 506(ii), 466, 468, 469 and 471 of IPC and 4 of Woman Harassment Act in Crime No.423 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence seek anticipatory bail. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners were charged under sections 341, 506(ii), 466, 468, 469 and 471 of IPC and 4 of Woman Harassment Act and the petitioners 1 and 2 are practicing advocates and the first petitioner got married the defacto complainant and the third petitioner is the friend of A1 and the accused Nos.1 and 2 were arrested and enlarged on bail and there is no overt act against A3 and hence, he prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the case has been registered against three persons and A1 and A2 were arrested and enlarged on bail and investigation is going on and he prays for dismissal of this application. 4. Considering the rival submissions made by both sides the alleged occurrence has been taken place on 3.6.2011 and the first and the second petitioners are advocates and the first petitioner fell in love with the defacto complainant and he fabricated the marriage certificate as if he got married the defacto complainant and he threatened the defacto complainant and even though the case has been registered during the filing of this anticipatory bail application A1 and A2 were arrested and enlarged on bail and hence, the anticipatory bail application for A1 and A2 is dismissed as infructuous. 5. In respect of A3 is concerned, only A1 and A2 are the main accused and they were arrested and enlarged on bail, I am inclined to grant bail to the third petitioner/A3. 6. Accordingly, the third petitioner is ordered to be released on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District and 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 third petitioner shall report before the court concerned daily at 10.30 am., until further orders. The third petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C Scrupulously. 7. The third petitioner 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 stands dismissed. sd/- 11/08/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SANKARANKOVIL 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI DIST 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SANKARANKOVIL TOWN POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI 4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S. M.SELVARAJ Advocate SR.No.27264 GH : 12.08.2011 : 2p/6c ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.8579 of 2011 Date :11/08/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/