1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty First day of December Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr. Justice V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.16674 of 2011 1 SUBASH 2 NAMBI 3 KALAYANI 4 MALA ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4 UMA PARVATHI ... INTERVENOR Vs STATE REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI JUNCTION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. (CR.NO.6 OF 2011) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. S.RAGAVENTHRE Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.S.DURAIPANDIAN, Addl. Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side) For Intervener : MR.A.SELVENDRAN, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners are arrayed as A-1 to A-4 and they prayed for grant of anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C., for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 406 of I.P.C and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 4 of Women Harassment Act in Crime No.6 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.Heard Ms.S.Ragaventhre, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr.A.Selvendran, learned counsel for the intervenor and Mr.K.S.Duraipandian, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Criminal side) appearing for the State. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition in respect of the first petitioner herein and she has also made an endorsement to that effect. 4. In view of the above, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as withdrawn in respect of the first petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 5. Insofar as the petitioners 2 to 4 are concerned, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that they are the in- laws of the de-facto complaint and they have got nothing to do with the alleged offence and they have been falsely implicated in this case. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor would oppose the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners 2 to 4. 7. Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. 8.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 2 to 4. Accordingly, the petitioners 2 to 4 are directed to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Tirunelveli 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 Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Tirunelvli and on further condition that the petitioners 2 to 4 shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners 2 to 4 shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously. 9.The petitioners 2 to 4 shall appear before the Magistrate concerned within a period of 15 days, failing which, the anticipatory bail granted shall stand automatically cancelled. sd/- 21/12/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.IV, TIRUNELVELI. 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUNELVELI. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI JUNCTION,TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. 4. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. S.RAGAVENTHRE Advocate SR.No.45078 +1. CC to MR.S.R.A.RAMACHANDRAN, Advocate SR No.44920 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.16674 of 2011 Date :21/12/2011 RJ/23.12.11 2p/7c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/