1 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.14333 of 2011 1.V.SARAVANAN 2.V.VELUCHAMY 3.V.PADMAVATHY 4.T.JOTHIRANI 5.B.MOHANA ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT. CRIME NO.NOT KNOWN/2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. N.SUBRAMANI 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 :- The petitioners are arrayed as accused and they prayed for grant of anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C., for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 498(A) and 506(ii) I.P.C in Crime No.12 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.Heard Mr.N.Subramani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr.S.Chellapandian learned counsel appearing for the intervenor and Mr.K.S.Duraipandian, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks permission of this court to withdraw this petition in respect of the petitioners 1 and 4 and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. 4. In view of the above, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as withdrawn in respect of the petitioners 1 and 4. 5. Insofar as the petitioners 2, 3 and 5 are concerned, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit in his argument that they are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submitted that the mediation was not materialised in between the parties. 6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit in his argument that insofar as the petitioners 2, 3 and 5 are concerned, they are in-laws of the de-facto complainant and if for any reason, they are https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 released on anticipatory bail, suitable conditions may be imposed. 7. I have considered the above submissions. 8. Considering the submissions made on either side, this Court could see that the mediation was not materialized in between the parties and the petitioners 2, 3 and 5 are in-laws of the def-acto complainant. Considering the above said facts, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 2, 3 and 5. 9. Accordingly, the petitioners 2, 3 and 5 are directed to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Karur 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 Judicial Magistrate No.I, Karur and on further condition that the second petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders and the petitioners 3 and 5 shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. 10.The petitioners shall appear before the Magistrate concerned within a period of 15 days, failing which, the anticipatory bail granted shall stand automatically cancelled. sd/- 21/12/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, KARUR 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KARUR 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT. 4 THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. N.SUBRAMANI Advocate SR.No.45095 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14333 of 2011 Date :21/12/2011 TR : 23.12.2011: 2p/6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/