Allowed

Ganeshkumar v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC15 Oct 2015CRL OP(MD)/10830/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to accused persons facing allegations of dowry harassment and cruelty. The court released the petitioners on bond with conditions to appear before authorities and comply with specific instructions, dismissing bail only if they fail to appear within 15 days.

What did the court decide?

The petitioners are released on bail upon appearance before the Judicial Magistrate and execution of a bond with sureties, subject to appearing before police as directed.

Ganeshkumar Vs the Inspector of Police — Dowry and Cruelty | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

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

¶2

Thursday, the Fifteenth day of October Two Thousand Fifteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.10830 of 2015

1 GANESHKUMAR

2 MALAISAMY

3 KALEESWARI

4 BHUVANESWARI 5 KARTHICK ... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1 TO 4 & 6

¶10

¶11

STATE REP. BY

¶12

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

¶13

ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI. ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT

¶14

For Petitioner : M/S.S.GOKUL RAJ Advocate

¶15

For Respondent : MS.S.PRABHA, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶16

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

¶17

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶18

The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1 to A4 and A6, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 498(A) and 506(ii) of I.P.C., r/w Section 4 of D.P.Act, in Crime No.12 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

¶19

2.According to the de-facto complainant that on 15.09.2013, she married the first accused and at the time of marriage, she was provided 45 sovereign of gold jewels and 6 sovereign of gold chain to the first accused and Rs.2 lakhs worth of silver articles were given and thereafter the accused have demanded another 50 sovereigns of gold jewels and Rs.1 lakh as cash as additional dowry and also harassed her.

¶20

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent person and they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that as per direction of this Court, the first petitioner and the de-facto complainant appeared before the Mediation Centre and both of them were ready for reunion, and after taking time, the de-facto complainant had filed a complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate in D.V.O.P.No.27 of 2015 against the first petitioner under Domestic Violence Act.

¶21

4.Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the State.

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions.

¶23

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.I, Sivagangai 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the first petitioner shall appear before the respondent police on every Saturdays and Sundays at 10.00 a.m., until further orders and the petitioners No.2 to 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.

¶24

The petitioners 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.

¶25

sd/-

¶26

15/10/2015

¶27

/ TRUE COPY /

¶28

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

¶29

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶30

Madurai - 625 023.

¶31

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, SIVAGANGAI.

¶32

2 DO THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.

¶33

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI.

¶34

4 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶35

+1. CC to M/S.S.GOKUL RAJ Advocate SR.No.61316

¶36

ORDER

¶37

¶38

CRL OP(MD) No.10830 of 2015

¶39

Date :15/10/2015

¶40

NS/SKS-RR/SAR II/26.10.2015 : 2P/6C

¶41

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

Ganeshkumar v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganeshkumar 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

P.Ashok Kumar Vs the Inspector of Police

A. Abubakkar Vs the Inspector of Police

Raj Vs the Inspector of Police

S.Arunachalam Vs State Rep by Inspector of

Suruliram Vs the State Rep by Inspector of

Suruliram Vs the State Rep by Inspector of