The Madurai Bench granted anticipatory bail to petitioners accused of offenses under sections 498A, 294B, 506 IPC, and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The court imposed strict reporting and bonding conditions.
Petitioners ordered to be released on bail upon execution of bond and compliance with reporting and conduct conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRL OP(MD).No.15050 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Date : 17/12/2020
PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRL OP(MD).No.15050 of 2020
1.Mathanraj 2.Santha 3.Manojkumar ... Petitioners 1 to 3/Accused Nos.1 to 3
Vs The State through, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Melur, Madurai District. Cr.No.19 of 2020. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners: Mr.S.Alagusundar, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C.
PRAYER :-
For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.19 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :-
The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1 to A3, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under sections 498(A), 294(B), 506(i) IPC., and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, in Crime No.19 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant. Due to matrimonial dispute between the defacto complainant and the first accused, the first petitioner along with other petitioners have demanded dowry and also harassed the defacto complainant. Hence, the case has been registered.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
1/3
CRL OP(MD).No.15050 of 2020
falsely implicated in this case.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), appearing for the respondent police strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or their appearance, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai District, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:
(a)the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;
(b)the first petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. without fail, for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation and the petitioner Nos.2 and 3 shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation;
(c)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(d)the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(e)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and;
(f)if the accused/petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.
sd/-
17/12/2020
/ TRUE COPY /
/ /2020
Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
2/3
CRL OP(MD).No.15050 of 2020
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
TO
+1. CC to M/S.S.ALAGUSUNDAR Advocate SR.No.26284 (F) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.15050 of 2020 Date :17/12/2020
VSD
PK/SMA/SAR-III/23.12.2020 : 3P/6C
3/3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners apprehending arrest in a dowry harassment case.
What conditions must be imposed on the petitioners while granting anticipatory bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
P.K. Shaji v. State of KeralaExplained¶25
P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560] · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Mathanraj
Santha
Manojkumar
The State
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
