1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Thirty First day of October Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S. TAMILVANAN CRL OP(MD) No.12343 of 2011 1.SUBASHINI 2.MURUGAN 3.GAJENDRAN ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 2 TO 4 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THANJAVUR MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL POLICE STATION, IN CRIME NO.349/2011, THANJAVUR DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. A.V.RAMANATHAN Advocate For Respondent : MR. K.V.RAJA RAJAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as A2 to A4 and facing charges under Section 366 IPC in crime No.349 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police, have come forward with the application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail. 2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/ A2 to A4 as well as the learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for the respondent. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that there was love affair between the co-accused/A1 and the alleged victim girl, Aarthi. The co-accused/A1 is an Engineering graduate and the alleged victim girl is a medical student. Marriage had taken place between the accused/A1 and the said Aarthi before the Sub-Registrar of Cuddalore on 07.10.2010. However, the case was registered against the petitioners under Sections 366 IPC though the petitioners are nothing to do with the alleged offence. Subsequently, a suit was also filed in O.S.No.370 of 2011 before the Subordinate Court, Tanjore seeking a declaration that the said marriage is null and void. Only as a counter blast the complaint was given and the same was registered against the accused/A-1, his sister, father and other close relatives, though they have nothing to do with the alleged offence. 4.Learned Government Advocate (crl. side) has not disputed that there is no bad antecedents against the petitioners. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find it just and reasonable to grant anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioners on reasonable conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Villupuram, and on each of them executing a personal 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 2 and 3 / A3 and A4 shall appear before the concerned Magistrate, daily at 10.30 a.m., for two weeks thereafter. The petitioners/ A2 to A4 shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. 6. The petitioners/ A2 to A4 shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy is made ready failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. sd/- 31/10/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VILLUPURAM 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VILLUPURAM 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THANJAVUR MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DISTRICT. 4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. A.V.RAMANATHAN Advocate SR.No.37353 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12343 of 2011 Date :31/10/2011 TR :04.11.2011: 2p/6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/