Rajan v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Eleventh day of June Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.10448 of 2015 RAJAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVATTAR POLICE STATION, THIRUVATTAR, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT, CRIME NO.250/2015 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.S.TITUS Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is the sole accused, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 379, 294(b) and 506(i) of I.P.C altered into 380, 294(b), 506(i) I.P.C and Sections 7 and 8 of POCSO Act in Crime No.250 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that on 30.04.2015 at 11.00 a.m, the accused entered into the house of the defacto complainant under the guise of drinking water and took away Rs.48,600/- and also misbehavioured with the daughter of the defacto complainant.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the complaint given on 01.05.2015, there is no allegation of misbehaviour of this petitioner with the daughter of the defacto complainant and in the 164 Cr.P.C statement also, the defacto complainant has not at all stated about the misbehaviour. The learned counsel further submitted that on the date of occurrence, there was a quarrel arose between the petitioner and the defacto complainant and therefore, a false complaint was given against him.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that the petitioner has taken away money from the house of the defacto complainant and the petitioner does not have any bad antecedents. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
4. Considering the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) and also considering the fact that the
petitioner does not have any bad antecedents, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions.
5. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Padmanabhapuram and on his executing 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent Police daily at 10.00 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously.
6. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.
sd/- 11/06/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PADMANABHAPURAM 2 -DO-THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVATTAR POLICE STATION, THIRUVATTAR, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S.S.TITUS Advocate SR.No.30373
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.10448 of 2015 Date :11/06/2015 NA/KBM/15/06/2015/P2/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/