BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Seventeenth day of August Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.10497 of 2011 R.V. RAMGANESH ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1 Vs THE STATE REP. BY THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, TALLAKULAM, MADURAI DISTRICT, CRIME NO.17/2011 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. R.PON KARTHIKEYAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S. A.RAMAR, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner is arrayed as A1 and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.07.2011 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 406 and 506(i) I.P.C., in Crime No.17 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is working as a Government servant and on the basis of a complaint given by his wife, a false case has been foisted against him along with his family members under Sections 498(A), 406 and 506 (i) I.P.C. He would further submit that A2, A3 and A5 were already enlarged on bail and A4 was already granted the relief of anticipatory bail. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that as per the F.I.R., the defacto complainant was always away from India and she has given a complaint on 19.06.2011, and the same has been compromised, thereafter, at the instigation of others, she has preferred the present complaint. He would further submit that the investigation is considerably over and he is in custody for nearly 30 days and hence, he prays for bail. 3. Refuting the same, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the marriage has been performed between the petitioner and defacto complainant on 06.05.2005, due to lawful wedlock, one male child was born. He would further submit that she is working in abroad, however, during her stay at India, the petitioner has harassed the defacto complainant, because of having illicit intimacy with one Rajakumari, hence she has given a complaint against the petitioner and his family members. He would further submit that the co-accused have already been released on bail and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ anticipatory bail and the investigation is going on and hence, he prays for dismissal of this application. 4. Considering the rival submissions made by both sides and admittedly, the marriage between the petitioner and the defacto complainant was performed on 06.05.2005 and due to the lawful wedlock, one male child was born. On perusal of the F.I.R., the defacto complainant is having avocation at foreign country, then and there, she visited Srilanka and Lebanon. The case of the defacto complainant is that the petitioner has illicit intimacy with one Rajakumari and they are demanding money and retaining eight sovereigns of jewels and Rs.5 lakhs, which was given by her. On 19.06.2011, the defacto complainant has given a complaint, subsequently, it was closed, after that both are living jointly. However, at the instigation of others, a present complainant has been given on 19.07.2011 and hence, the petitioner was arrested. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and also considering the fact that since it is a matrimonial dispute and the co-accused have already been released on bail and anticipatory bail and the investigation is considerably over, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his 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.II, Madurai, and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the Court concerned daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. sd/- 17/08/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, MADURAI 2 -DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4 THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, TALLAKULAM, MADURAI DISTRICT 5 THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S. R.PON KARTHIKEYAN Advocate SR.No.27828 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10497 of 2011 Date :17/08/2011 SMA/17.8.2011/7C/2P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/