1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Nineteenth day of September Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.12385 of 2011 1.THANGAMANI 2.MARIAMMAL ... PETITIONERS Vs THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, SANKARANKOVIL, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT, CRIME NO.15/2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. G.BHAGAVATH SINGH 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/Accused apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b),506(2) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act, in Crime No.15 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the first petitioner is the father-in-law and the second petitioner is the grandmother of the de-facto complainant and a false case has been foisted against the petitioners under Sections 294(b),506(2) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act. He further submits that the alleged occurrence took place on 18.06.2011 and the petitioners are very old, A1 was already arrested and enlarged on bail and the marriage between the first accused and the de-facto complainant has been performed three years back, since she was not gave birth to a child so the wordy quarrel arose and A1 eloped with other lady and the investigation is considerably over and hence, they prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 3.Refuting the same, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the case has been registered against three persons; A1 is the husband of the de-facto complainant and he was arrested and enlarged on bail, the husband eloped with one lady and the complaint was given by the de-facto complainant and the investigation is going on and hence he prays for dismissal of this application. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4.Considering the rival submissions it is seen that the case has been registered against three persons, A1 is the husband of the de-facto complainant and he eloped with one lady and on the basis of the complaint given by the de-facto complainant A1 was arrested and enlarged on bail; A2 is the father-in-law and A3 is the grandmother and the case has been registered on 18.06.2011 and even though the petitioners were not arrested they neither interfered with the investigation nor absconding from the jurisdiction, 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 their arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri, 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 Judicial 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 petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously. 5. The petitioner 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/- 19/09/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGIRI 2.THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI 3.THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, SANKARANKOVIL, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT, 4.THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. G.BHAGAVATH SINGH Advocate SR.No.32304 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12385 of 2011 Date :19/09/2011 TR : 22.09.2011: 2p/6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/