1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT (Criminal Jurisdiction) Wednesday, the Seventh day of September Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.11141 of 2011 1 GOPAL 2 DAVID 3 CHARLES :PETITIONERS / ACCUSED NOS.2,4 AND 6 -Vs- THE STATE REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AMBATHURAI POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.252 OF 2011) :RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. V.MUTHUVELAN, Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.RAMAR, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. ORDER:The Court Made the following order:- The petitioner/Accused Nos.2,4 and 6 were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.06.2011 for the alleged offences punishable under sections 366(A) of IPC in Crime No.252 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the first petitioner is the distant relative of A1 and the second petitioner is the brother-in-law of A1 and the case of the prosecution is on 29.06.2011, the victim girl Salinidevi aged about 17 ½ years was kidnapped by the petitioners and other accused as such the petitioners are facilitated to kidnap the victim girl and a case has been registered under section 366(A) of IPC. He further submitted that A1 and the victim girl loved with each other and the victim girl eloped with the second petitioner's son on 29.06.2011 and the petitioners were arrested on 30.06.2011 and they are in judicial custody for more than 70 days and a victim girl herself sent a letter to the investigation agency and the petitioners are innocent persons. He further submitted that the first petitioner/A2 was enlarged on statutory bail under section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. and hence, he come forward with this application and he prays for enlargement on bail for the petitioners 2 and 3/A4 and A6 only. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.side) would submit that the father of the victim girl filed H.C.P before this court which is pending and A1, A3, A5 and A7 are yet to be arrested and the girl is yet to be secured and investigation is going on and they are taking steps to secure the victim girl aged about 17 years and hence, he prays for dismissal of this application. 4.Considering the rival submissions made by both sides, on perusal of case diary, it could be seen that the alleged occurrence has been taken place on 25.06.2011 and the complaint has been given on 29.06.2011 at 7 hours against the seven named persons and the petitioners are arrayed as A2, A4 and A6. In that complaint it was stated that age of the girl is 17 years and on perusal of case diary which shows that a letter has been received by the investigation agency through courier alleged to have been sent by the victim girl. Even though the petitioners were arrested on 30.06.2011 and interrogation is already over and since A1, A3, A5 and A7 were absconded, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 5.Accordingly, the second and the third petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their 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 learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Dindigul, and on further condition that the second and third petitioners shall appear before the Judicial Magistrate No:III, Dindigul daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. sd/- 07/09/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO: 1.The Judicial Magistrate No:III, Dindigul. 2.-Do- Thro' The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dindigul. 3.The Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 4.The Sub Inspector of Police, Ambathurai Police Station, Dindigul District. 5.The Officer In-charge, Sub Jail, Dindigul. +1. CC to M/S. V.MUTHUVELAN Advocate SR.No.30185. RP/08.09.2011/2P/7C. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.11141 of 2011 Date :07/09/2011. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/