V.Karthik v. State By The Inspectore Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 05.05.2020 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN

1. V.Karthik

2. K.Godson

3. R.Praveen Kumar

4. V.Venkadesh ..... Petitioners/Accused 3to 6 Vs.

State by the Inspector of Police, E-3, Saravanampatty Police Station, Coimbatore District, Crime No.507 of 2020. ..... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest concerned in Crime No. 507 of 2020 pending on the file of the Respondent. For Petitioners : Mr.S.N.Arunkumar For Respondent : Mr.Shanmuga Rajendran, Public Prosecutor.

******** 1/5

ORDER

Apprehending arrest for the offences punishable under section 75(1)(c) of TNCP Act and sections 147, 148, 323, 379 and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.507 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, the petitioners have come forward with the petition seeking for Anticipatory Bail.

2. Briefly stated, according to the prosecution, on 18.03.2020, at about 10A.M., there had been quarrel between the accused persons involved in the abovesaid crime and the defacto complainant and in that process, the petitioners and the other accused abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and also assaulted him with the helmet and threatened him with dire consequences and also took away the motor cycle of the defacto complainant and thereby committed the offences put forth against them.

3. According to the petitioners, they had not committed the offences as alleged by the prosecution and it is stated that the petitioners and the defacto complainant are studying in the same college and following the dispute between them and the defacto complainant, there had been some enmity between the two groups and it is further put forth that the petitioners 2/5

had levelled a counter case against the defacto complainant in Crime No.506 of 2020 and the same is pending and further, it is stated that the coaccused involved in this crime had already been released on bail and the petitioners are ready to cooperate with the investigation agency and accordingly, prayed for their enlargement on bail in the event of arrest.

4. Per contra, it is put forth by the learned Public Prosecutor that the investigation is still pending and admitted that the co-accused had already been released on bail and opposed the relief prayed for by the petitioners.

5. Considering the nature of the accusation levelled against the petitioners, furthermore, as it is represented that the co-accused had already been released on bail and further, as the defacto complainant had not sustained any serious injury and also not admitted in the hospital and further, the motor cycle involved in the occurrence having already been recovered and there is also a counter case with reference to this incident and considering the submissions put forth by the petitioners that they would cooperate with the investigation agency in all aspects, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners on conditions.

3/5

6. For the reasons aforestated, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest or on their appearance within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the Judicial Magistrate - II, Coimbatore, on condition of they each executing a bond for Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who arrest them or the Judicial Magistrate aforestated. The petitioners are also directed to strictly adhere to the conditions set out under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

7. Accordingly, the criminal original petition is allowed. 05.05.2020 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No sli To:

1. The Inspector of Police, E-3, Saravanampatty Police Station, Coimbatore District, Crime No.507 of 2020.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. T.RAVINDRAN,J 4/5

sli CRL.OP.No.7422 of 2020 05.05.2020 5/5