Allowed

P.Surendhar v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC8 Apr 2015CRL OP(MD)/19891/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to four petitioners accused of dowry harassment and cruelty under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Bail is subject to bond, sureties, and appearance before police and magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail upon executing Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties for Rs.10,000 each, subject to appearance before police and Magistrate.

P.Surendhar Vs the Inspector of Police — Dowry and Cruelty | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Wednesday, the Eighth day of April Two Thousand Fifteen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶6

CRL OP(MD) No.19891 of 2014

1 P.SURENDHAR

2 V.PANDIAN

3 PERUMAYE

4 S.DEEPA

..PETITIONERS/ACCUSED

¶12

Vs.

¶13

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, UTHAMAPALAYAM, THENI DISTRICT.

¶14

CR. NO. NOT KNWON OF 2014. ..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶15

For Petitioner : M/S.S.PALANIVELAYUTHAM Advocate

¶16

For Respondent : Mr.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

¶17

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

¶18

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶19

The petitioners, who are arrayed as accused, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 498(A) of I.P.C., and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in Crime No.17 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

¶20

2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused was demanded dowry of Rs.50,000/- from the de-facto complainant and also harassed her.

¶21

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the defacto complainant has filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.133 of 2013 before the Sub Court, Uthamapalayam for restitution of conjugal rights and the first accused filed a petition for divorce and after institution of the case, the de-facto complainant has lodged the complaint. He further submitted that the accused have returned the articles belonging to the de-facto complainant.

¶22

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submits that the the accused have returned the articles to the de-facto complainant and the investigation is at initial stage.

¶23

5.However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions.

¶24

6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, uthamapalayam, Theni District and on each of them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two common https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for

¶25

interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

¶26

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.

¶27

sd/-

¶28

08/04/2015

¶29

/ TRUE COPY /

¶30

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

¶31

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, UTHAMAPALAYAM, THENI DISTRICT.

¶32

2 -DO-THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THENI.

¶33

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

¶34

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, UTHAMAPALAYAM, THENI DISTRICT.

¶35

+1. CC to M/S.S.PALANIVELAYUTHAM Advocate SR.No.18067

¶36

PBK/SAR-I 10/04/2015 ::2P-6C:

¶37

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

P.Surendhar v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Surendhar 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

Revathi Vs the Inspector of Police

M.Kumaraswami Vs the Inspector of Police

Periyakaruppu Vs Deputy Superintendent of

Shanmugaprasad Vs the Inspector of Police

Karuppasamy Vs the Inspector of Police

Thonthiamma Vs the Inspector of Police