KOKILA Vs. KALPANA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition in Crl.O.P.No.1977 of 2014 has been filed by the de facto complainant to cancel the bail granted to the first accused in Crl.M.P.No.389 of 2015 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambathur, Chennai, whereas, the first accused in Crl.M.P.No.389 of 2015 has filed Crl.O.P.No.6974 of 2015 to modify the condition imposed in the bail order dated 19.1.2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur, Thiruvallur District and permit her to furnish sureties or pay cash sureties to the satisfaction of some other learned Magistrate, as fixed by this Court instead of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur, Chennai.

(2.) Since the decision that is going to be taken in one petition will have a bearing on the another petition, both the petitions are disposed of by this common order.

(3.) For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as de facto complainant and the petitioner / accused.