1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Eleventh day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.NAGAMUTHU CRL OP(MD) No.14354 of 2011 1.INDIRA 2.UDAIYAR 3.ARUMUGAM ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Vs STATE: REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALAIYARKOIL POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT CR.317/2011. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. S.MAHENDRAPATHY 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 in Crime No.317 of 2011, for offences under Sections 498(A) and 306 IPC, the petitioners are before this Court seeking Anticipatory Bail. 2. According to the case of the prosecution, the first petitioner is the sister-in-law, the second petitioner is the father-in-law and the third petitioner is the mother-in-law of the deceased. The second accused, in this case, is the husband of the deceased. The petitioners are accused 1, 3 and 4 respectively. The marriage between the second accused and the deceased took place long before and they have got two children also. At the time when the first petitioner herein was given in marriage, the jewels belonging to the deceased were received by the second accused and pledged to meet out the marital expenses, and subsequently, the jewels were redeemed, due to which, dispute arose between the second accused and the deceased. Depressed over the same, it is alleged that the deceased committed suicide by consuming poison. So far these petitioners are concerned, there is no specific overt act. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would deny the above allegations. According to him, the petitioners are not responsible for the said occurrence. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. I have considered the above submissions. As of now, from the narration of the facts, it is clear that there is no material to show that these petitioners had any mens rea to drive the deceased to commit suicide and there is no positive act, forcing the victim to commit suicide. Thus, prima facie, I find that there is case in favour of the petitioners for grant of Anticipatory Bail. 5. In the result, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail, in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.I, Sivagangai, executing a separate 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that petitioners 1 and 3 shall report before the respondent police for a period of eight weeks every day at 10.30 a.m., without fail and the second petitioner shall remain at Sivagangai and appear before the All Women Police Station for a period of four weeks every day at 10.30 AM, without fail. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C scrupulously. sd/- 11/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, SIVAGANGAI 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGANGAI 3 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALAIYARKOIL POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT 5 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. S.MAHENDRAPATHY Advocate SR.No.39164 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14354 of 2011 Date :11/11/2011 TR :12.11.2011: 2p/7c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/