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.16742 of 2011 1. BANUMATHI 2. S.N.SUBRAMANIAN 3. S.S.DHANALAKSHMI 4. SIVAKUMAR : PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS.5 to 8 Vs. THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AVANIYAPURAM POLICE STATION, CR.NO.292/2008 : RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. D.MALAICHAMY Advocate For Respondent : Mr. K.S.DURAI PANDIAN Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 306 of I.P.C., in Crime No.292 of 2008 on the file of the respondent police, the petitioners have approached this Court for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Heard Mr.D.Malaichamy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.K.S.Duraipandian, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit in his argument that the petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.5 to 8 and they are relatives of the defacto complainant and first accused and the first petitioner is the Junior Maternal Aunt and the petitioners 2 and 3 are the grand parents and the fourth petitioner is the brother of A1 and there is no specific overt act as against the petitioners. He would further submit that they are living separately and there is no connection to scold the deceased woman for the death of the child belonging to the defacto complainant and the first accused. 4. He would further submit in his argument that the accused No.4 was granted anticipatory bail who was also on the same footing. The petitioners are living separately from A1 and the defacto complainant and hence, no prejudice would be caused to the prosecution in the event of the petitioners released on anticipatory bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit in his argument that the case of the year 2008 and the investigation is still pending and is at the stage of completion and filing of charge sheet. He would also submit that A4 was granted anticipatory bail and if for any reason, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, stringent condition may be imposed for the secured presence of the petitioners. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I could see that the alleged occurrence said to have taken place was consuming of poison by the deceased woman on 23.08.2008 upon the instigation by scolding the victim girl by all the accused persons that she was the cause of the death of her child. This Court on an earlier occasion had granted regular bail to the accused Nos.1,2 and 3 in Crl.O.P.Nos.8672 & 9318 of 2008 and the learned Sessions Judge granted anticipatory bail to the fourth accused in Cr.M.P.No.3596 of 2008, No doubt it is true that the fourth accused is in the same footing with that of the present petitioner and the investigation is almost completed. At this stage there would not be any tampering of witness and the hampering of investigation. Therefore, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai 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 Nos.1,2 & 3 shall appear before the respondent police as and when required and the fourth petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. 7. 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 stands dismissed. sd/- 21/12/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.6, MADURAI. 2. -DO- THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT. 3. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AVANIYAPURAM POLICE STATION, MADURAI. +1 CC to M/S. D.MALAICHAMY Advocate SR.No.44971 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.16742 of 2011 Date :21/12/2011 NSV/22.12.11/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/