Mahalingam v. State Rep. By

in CRL OP NO.2632of 2024 Judgment reserved on 04.09.2024 Judgment pronounced on RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

This petition is filed by the defacto complainant for cancellation of anticipatory bail for non-compliance of order passed by this Court dated 21.02.2024.

2. Notice was ordered. Learned counsel for the second respondent filed counter. When the matter is taken up for hearing,both the parties have submitted that conditions prescribed in the anticipatory bail order was complied with by effecting payment of Rs.4,00,000/- by the 2nd respondent/accused.

3. Mr.Paul Kanagaraj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/defacto complainant would draw my attention to the additional clause wherein the accused has agreed to settle the amount however he has not settled the amount before the mediation.

1/3

4. Heard the parties and perused the records.

5. In the order of this Court dated 21.02.2024, I have observed in Para 6 as "with regard to claim under Section 138 Cr.P.C., it is for the parties to settle the matter in C.C.No.260 of 2023 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Pollachi before Mediation Centre, Coimbatore". The settlement has to be arrived at between the parties and the same cannot be a hyperbolic interpretation as projected by the learned counsel for the petitioner/defacto complainant. As the condition of Rs.4,00,000/- to be deposited by the 2nd respondent / accused being complied with, I find no reason for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the 2nd respondent/accused.

6. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

rgr 2/3

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

rgr 3/3