Ravindran v. The Inspector Of Police

EFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Nineteenth day of June Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.11102 of 2015 RAVINDRAN ... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SAMINATHAPURAM POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DT, CRIME NO.106/2015 ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.T.LENIN KUMAR Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as the sole accused in Crime No.106 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 06.05.2015 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b) and 506(ii) of I.P.C., and Section 3(1) of TNPPDL Act, and hence, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that due to money dispute, the petitioner had abused the de-facto complainant and caused damage the wind screen of the de-facto complainant's vehicle to the tune of Rs.5,000/-.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was Ex-councillor of Vayalur Panchayat in Palani Taluk and due to political motive, he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner had borrowed only Rs.10,000/- from the de-facto complainant and due to charging of exorbitant interest, there was a wordy quarrel arose between them and a false case has been foisted against him. He further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the de-facto complainant without prejudice to his rights in the criminal case.

4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side)submitted that the petitioner is a history sheeted rowdy and he is having 7 previous cases and due to money dispute, the petitioner had threatened the de-facto complainant also and caused damage the wind screen of the de-facto complainant's vehicle.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail on the following conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on 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 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

learned Judicial Magistrate, Palani and on further condition that the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the de-facto complainant by way of demand draft and on further condition that the petitioner shall reside at Dindigul and report before the Dindigul Taluk Police Station daily twice ie., at 10.00 a.m., and 05.00 p.m., until further orders. sd/- 19/06/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PALANI.

2 DO-THRO'THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DINDIGUL.

3 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, SUB JAIL,PALANI.

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SAMINATHAPURAM POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT. THE OFFICER INCHARGE, DINDIGUL TALUK POLICE STATION,DINDIGUL DISTRICT. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.T.LENIN KUMAR Advocate SR.No.32134

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.11102 of 2015 Date :19/06/2015 PA/AMF/19.06.2015/2P/8C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/