Allowed

Suresh v. State Rep by

Madras HC1 Feb 2022CRL OP/2296/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners Suresh and Sabeena in an FIR alleging dowry harassment, elf marriage, and child sexual offenses. The Court released them against a bond and conditions including reporting, non-tampering with evidence, and prohibition of absconding, while noting the investigation was nearly complete.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; petitioners released on bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties subject to conditions of non-tampering, reporting, and non-absconding.

Suresh Vs State Rep by — Dowry and Cruelty | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 01.02.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.2296 of 2022

¶6

1.Suresh

¶7

2.Sabeena ... Petitioners

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tiruchengode, Namakkal District. (Crime No.38 of 2021) ... Respondent

¶10

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent police concerned in crime No.38 of 2021, on the file of the respondent Police.

¶11

For Petitioners : Mr.W.Camyles Gandhi

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 366 of IPC and Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, and Section 5(I), 5(j) (ii) r/w 6, 21(1) of the POCSO Act, 2012, in Cr.No.38 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶15

The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant, who is daughter-in-law of the 3^rd accused is the victim girl. The victim girl's mother deserted the victim father (1s^t petitioner) when she was three months old. After that she was raised by her father and her father married another women (2^nd petitioner). The stepmother ill-treated the victim girl. While things remain so, in view of love and affection and due care shown by the 3^rd accused's son, the victim girl eloped with the 3^rd accused's son without

¶16

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

¶17

informing parents of both side. It is pertinent to mention that when the victim girl married the 3^rd accused's son, she was only aged about 16 years. Further, out of said wedlock, the victim girl and 3^rd accused's son blessed with a female child on 27.09.2021, at Salem Government Hospital. Since the petitioners have scolded the victim girl for not feeding the child and deteriorated by the same, the victim girl attempted to commit suicide. Hence, the complaint.

¶18

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioners are ready to furnish sufficient sureties for their release on bail. He further submits that the Co-accused already released on bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.963 of 2022, dated 20.01.2022. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶19

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that investigation is almost completed and Co-accused has already been released on bail by this Court.

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions made by both counsel and that the investigation is almost completed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶21

Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days after lifting of lockdown or the commencement of the Court's normal functioning whichever is earlier, before the learned Mahila cum Fast Track Court, Namakkal, on condition that the petitioner shall execute 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶22

(a)the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

¶23

(b)the petitioners shall report before the respondent police as and when required for an interrogation;

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

(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 has 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;

¶28

(f)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

¶29

-sd/-

¶30

01/02/2022

¶31

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶32

TRUE COPY

¶33

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶34

¶35

1 THE MAHILA CUM FAST TRACK COURT, NAMAKKAL.

¶36

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION TIRUCHENGODE NAMAKKAL DISTRICT

¶37

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶38

+1 CC to W.CAMYLES GANDHI Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.1628

¶39

CRL OP.2296/2022

¶40

Date :01/02/2022 JPA 07/02/2022

¶41

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

Suresh v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh 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

Ajith @ Ajith Kumar Vs State by

Ayyandurai Vs State Rep by

Velkumar Vs State Rep by

A.Rajendran Vs State Rep by

Manikandan Vs State Rep by

Valliammal Vs State Rep by