BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twelfth day of October Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.NAGAMUTHU CRL OP(MD) No.13596 of 2011 1 ABDUL RAHMAN 2 BAKKIRAL 3 SHEHU AMMAL 4 BAKKIR MOHIDEEN ...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2 TO 5 Vs STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION(RURAL), PALAYAMKOTTAI, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT CRIME NO. 13/2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. S.M.A.JINNAH Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.S.DURAI PANDY, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Apprehending arrest , the petitioner in Crime No.13 of 2011 on the file of the respondent Police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b) and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code and under section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act, has come forward with this Petition seeking for anticipatory bail. 2.According to the case of the prosecution, the petitioners are in-laws of the defacto complainant. The marriage between the first accused and the defacto complainant was solemnized many years ago and there are two children out of the said wedlock. The allegation is that the petitioners along with the first accused harassed her by demanding dowry. Now, it is alleged that the first accused has married another women deserting the defacto complaainant. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the first accused has already been arrested and released on bail. He would further submit that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.Having regard to the fact that there are only vague allegations against the petitioners and there is no specific overtact attributed to any one of the petitioners in the complaint and also having regard to the fact that the first accused has already been arrested and released on bail, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.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.V, Tirunelveli, on each executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten Thousand only) with two sureties ecah for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police every day at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Sction 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously. sd/- 12/10/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V TIRUNELVELI 2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT 3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION(RURAL), PALAYAMKOTTAI, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT +1. CC to M/S. S.M.A.JINNAH Advocate SR.No.35338 rl/6c – 14.10.2011 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.13596 of 2011 Date :12/10/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/