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.11516 of 2011 1. LOGANAYAGEE 2. THIRUMOORTHY 3. MEENACHI 4. SUBRAMANIAN : PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Vs. THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MADURAI TOWN, U/S.406, 498A, R/W 34 IPC CRIME NO.20/2011 : RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. J.GUNASHEELANMUTHIAH Advocate For Respondent : Mr. A.RAMAR Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 498(A) and r/w 341 I.P.C in Crime No.20 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are arrayed as A2 to A4 and they are the in-laws of the de-facto complainant. He would further submit that a case has been registered for the offences under Sections 406, 498(A) and r/w 341 I.P.C and A1 being the husband of the de-facto complainant who was arrested and enlarged on bail and a complaint has been given on 25.08.2011 and H.M.O.P is also pending and they apprehend for arrest and hence, he prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 3. Refuting the same, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) would submit that the marriage was performed between them in the year 2007. He would further submit that the petitioners along with A1 demanding of Deepavali and Pongal seervarisai and A3 along with his friends chatted in the de-facto complainant's room and the investigation is going on and hence, he prays for dismissal of this application. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4. Considering the rival submissions made by both sides and also considering the fact that the marriage was performed between them in the year 2007 and the allegation is that demanding of Deepavali and Pongal seervarisai and as per the version of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.side), A3 being the brother-in-law of the de- facto complainant along with his friends chatted in the de-facto complainant's room and A1 being the husband of the de-facto complainant who was arrested and enlarged on bail and the investigation is considerably over and the petitioners are only the in-laws of the de-facto complainant, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, 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, Madurai and 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 shall report before the Court concerned daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously. 5. 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/- 07/09/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.1 MADURAI. 2. -DO- THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT. 3. THE ADDITINOAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, MADURAI TOWN. +1 CC to M/S. J.GUNASHEELANMUTHIAH Advocate SR.No.30616 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.11516 of 2011 Date :07/09/2011 NSV/12.9.11/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/