 Day 1: Date: 14.12.

2016

Today was the first day of the internship with the public prosecutor Mr.dhanasekaran. He gave a

brief introduction of how the filling of a petition works. The P.A of the public prosecutor

introduced to the work carried by the PP. it is clear that public prosecutor is the person who handles

all the cases for the government in that district. As of now the district judge seat is vacant so only

the bail petition are being heard by the session judge. I then accompanied the public prosecutor to

the 1st additional court session judge regarding the bail petition of a criminal case, which he told me

to observe of the proceedings for the bail petition (Case name:satheesh(A1) and john(A2) versus

sub inspector of police ) . The above case was about both the accused snatched money from the

complainant forcefully. So the police has filed under section 392, 397 and 506(ii). The bail

application was dimissed.

Personal police of the PP explained about the different types of bail petition which can be filed

1. Relaxation bail- to relax the condition (sankar ganesh, thangavel, kumar, sundaram, viaya v.

sub inspector of police C.M.P no: 4291/2016)

2. Anticipatory bail- k. rajendran v. sub inspector of crime branch Crl.M.P.No 4151 of 2016)

Then I read different bail petition order, which was accepted and cancelled by the judge.

 Day 2: Date: 15.12.16

Case name: Lakshmi and anbarasi v. sub inspector of police (Cr.M.P.no: 4330/2016)

Fact: Lakshmi (1st petitioner) and widowed daughter (2nd petitioner). Police have arrested them

based on the complainant given by one navamani on 13.10.16. the petitioners son was married to

the complainants daughter. On 13.10.16 at 8:00 clock the complainant received a call from his son
in law stating that his daughter committed suicide. The police has registered a case under sec 174

Cr.p.c for suspicious death. After the RDO inquiry it was altered to 304(B) IPC. Later

manikandan(husband) was arrested. The petitioners claim that the grandkids of petitioner 1 and

children of petitioner 2 are suffering due to the arrest. As the police are searching for their arrest

the petitioners want anticipatory bail.

Case name: sindhuja v. k.r.prakash and s.i of police

This is a intervene petition. She is the de facto complainant in the below bail petition. The police

registered a case against the accused (A1) husband under section 498(A), 506(i) on 25.1.16.

Accused filed a bail petition for pre arrest bail. The fact is that the marriage between petitioner and

the accused took place on 22.6.14. The petitioner’s father gave 31 sovereigns gold, 50,000 worth

furniture and 5,00,000 in cash. Four months after the marriage the mother (A2) and sister (A3) of

A1 influenced him to demand 10,00,000 from his wife. So they treated her cruelly and also he

went abroad leaving her in his house. The accused has also filed a complaint C.S.R. No. 360/2016

stating that the petitioner is having illegal affair. So this is the objection to grant pre-arrest bail.

Later in the bail application by the accused (crime no.11/2016) (A.W.P.S. ammapet)

The accused argued that the allegations made against him was false and telling that his wife is

having illegal affair and that he has already filed a case C.S.R. No. 360/2016. Also that he would

be tortured by the police, so he requests for bail.

Case name: maikandan v. s.i of police ( cr.no.440/2016 of eddpadi P.S)

The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 20.11.2016 for the allege offence

under 306 of IPC based on the complaint given by the father in law on 20.11.16. the complaint

was that the petitioners wife hanged herself after her husbands business faced a heavy loss and the

petitioner told her to get money from her father. She committed suicide when she went to her
parents house. The accused claims that he is innocent and she hanged herself only after a fight

with her father. So the petitioner wants bail. The bail petition was dismissed.