Allowed

Govindaraj v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC12 Feb 2014CRL OP(MD)/1316/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner arrayed as accused No. 4 in a kidnapping-for-marriage case sought anticipatory bail. The court allowed the petition subject to appearing before the magistrate, executing a bond, and reporting to police daily.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail upon arrest or appearance, execution of bond with two sureties of Rs.10,000 each, and daily reporting to police for four weeks.

Govindaraj Vs the Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶2

Wednesday, the Twelfth day of February Two Thousand Fourteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.SATHYANARAYANAN

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.1316 of 2014

¶6

GOVINDARAJ ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO. 4

¶7

STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE JEMBUNATHAPURAM POLICE STAITON, TRICHY DIST. CR. NO. 10/2014. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶8

For Petitioner : M/S.N.ANANDAKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : MRS.S.PRABHA Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶9

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

¶10

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶11

There are totally four accused. This petitioner, who is arrayed as A-4, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 366(A) I.P.C, said to have been taken place on 19.01.2014, registered in Cr.No.10 of 2014, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶12

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is aged about 17 years, studying 12^th standard and the first accused had fallen in love with her and also wanted her to marry and he asked her to come out on a particular day on 18.01.2014 and accordingly, believing his words, she came out of the house. At that time, she was taken in a Maruthi Van bearing Regn.No.TN 48 Y 5508.

¶13

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit A-1 is absconding and accused Nos.2 & 3 were arrested and enlarged on bail by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thuraiyur and except the fact that the petitioner happened to be the driver of the van, he is nothing to do with the alleged commission of offence. He would further submit that the victim girl voluntarily came out of her house for the purpose of marrying the first accused. But, on seeing her relatives, she started behaving in a different manner.

¶14

4.The learned Government (Crl.Side) appearing for the State would submit that the victim girl has been secured and she has not been subjected to any physical abuse and that investigation is pending.

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5.Considering the nature of the allegation and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, subject to the following conditions.

¶16

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thuraiyur and on 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 petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 11.00 a.m for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C., scrupulously.

¶17

7.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.

¶18

sd/12/02/2014

¶19

/ TRUE COPY /

¶20

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶21

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THURAIYUR 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TRICHY 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE JEMBUNATHAPURAM POLICE STAITON, TRICHY. 4 THE ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S.N.ANANDAKUMAR Advocate SR.No.9512 AA/14.02.2014/2p- 6c/

¶22

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.1316 of 2014 Date :12/02/2014

¶23

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Govindaraj v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govindaraj v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A. Panneerselvam Vs the Inspector of Police

Dhanapaul Vs the Inspector of Police

Sankar Vs the Inspector of Police

Malarmani Vs the Inspector of Police

Muthaiah Vs the Inspector of Police

A.Muthu Vs the Insepctor of Police