Allowed

Venkitesan v. State Rep by

Madras HC25 Jun 2021CRL OP/10949/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the petitioners in a criminal case involving dowry harassment and death of the female accused, subject to execution of surrender bonds, sureties, and specific reporting conditions, considering their period of incarceration and the pandemic situation.

What did the court decide?

Grant of bail to the petitioners on execution of bonds for Rs. 10,000/- each and securing sureties within four weeks along with other stringent conditions.

Venkitesan Vs State Rep by — Dowry and Cruelty | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 25.06.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.10949 of 2021

¶6

1.Venkitesan
2.Rani ... Petitioners
Vs.
The State Represent by
The Inspector of Police,
Gingee Police Station,
Villupuram District.
Crime No.442 of 2021. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Original petition has been filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C, prayed to enlarge the petitioners on bail in connection with
the case in Cr.No.442 of 2021 pending investigation on the file of the
respondent Police.
For Petitioners : Mr.K.Madhan
For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath
Government Advocate (Crl side)
ORDER

¶7

The petitioners, who were arrested on 05.05.2021 and remanded to judicial custody for the offences under Section 174(3) Cr.P.C. @ 498(A), 304(B) IPC in Cr.No.442 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶8

The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the mother of the deceased. She lodged a complaint before the respondent Police by stating that she was solemnized the marriage of her daughter with the 1^st petitioner in the year 2019 and they were blessed with a female child. Thereafter, the petitioners demanded dowry from the deceased and assaulted her by pouring kerosene on her and set her in blaze.

¶9

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

¶10

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are no way connected with the alleged offence and they have been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioners have been in jail from 05.05.2021. Therefore, he prays to grant bail to the petitioners.

¶11

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) vehemently opposed the grant of bail by stating that there were totally three accused. A1 is the husband of the deceased, A2 is the mother-in-law and A3 is the brother-in-law. The deceased was aged about 22 years and the allegation is that the petitioners have repeatedly demanded dowry from the deceased and further the 1^st petitioner is having illegal intimacy with another lady and due to which, the deceased had committed suicide and the investigation is pending.

¶12

Considering the facts of period of incarceration suffered by the petitioners and also the present COVID-19 pandemic situation, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions:

¶13

(a) the 1^st petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) before the Superintendent, Central Prison, Cuddalore, and the 2^nd petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) before the Superintendent, Central Prison (Women), Cuddalore, in which the petitioners are confined and on such execution the petitioners shall be released from prison;

¶14

(b) Within a period of four weeks after the release, the petitioners shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Gingee;

¶15

(c ) In case of any difficulty in executing the said bond along with the sureties before the concerned Magistrate within the time stipulated above, the petitioners are permitted to file appropriate petition within a period of four week therefrom before the concerned Magistrate for extension of time for executing the bond along with sureties and if any such application is filed, the concerned Magistrate shall decide on the grant of extension of time for accepting the bond and sureties in accordance with law. Failing filing of any such application within the time prescribed above, the bail granted by this Court would stand automatically vacated.

¶16

(d)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;

¶17

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

¶18

(e)the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

¶19

(f)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶20

(g)the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶21

(h)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;

¶22

(i)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC. -sd/25/06/2021 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, GINGEE. 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VILLUPURAM [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, CUDDALORE. 4 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON (WOMEN), CUDDALORE.

¶23

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

¶24

5 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶25

6 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, GINGEE POLICE STATION, VILLUPURAM DISTRICT.

¶26

CC to M/S.K.MADHAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶27

CRL OP.10949/2021
Date :25/06/2021
cs 28/06/2021

¶28

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

Venkitesan v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkitesan v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Karuppusamy, Vs State by

Siva Vs the State Rep.by

R.Vignesh Vs State

Arul @ Arulkumar Vs State Rep. by

D.Jayapradha Vs Mariappan

N.Sachidanandam, Vs the Inspector of Police