Aravindan v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Fifth day of June Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.11641 of 2015 ARAVINDAN ... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED No.1 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KUMBAKONAM EAST POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DIST. CRIME NO. 202/2015. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.R.JOHN SATHYAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.K.V.RAJARAJAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for an alleged offences punishable under Section 379 of IPC in Crime No.202 of 2015, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent.
3. The case of the prosecution is that one P. Muruganantham lodged a complaint on 16.06.2015 alleging that on 27.05.2015, his two wheeler bearing registration No.TN 51 AZ 7273 was missing with passport and other records.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is working as a Development Officer in LIC and the case is registered only on suspicion, based on entry in CCTV Camera. He further submitted that on 27.05.2015, the petitioner along with other employees had gone to the hotel to take lunch and they were not aware of theft of the two wheeler of the de facto complainant. He further submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the two wheeler has not been recovered so far, and the case was registered based on the complaint given by one Muruganantham. He further submitted that the the petitioner has no bad antecedents.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kumbakonam, and 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 6.00 pm for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.
7. 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/- 25/06/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KUMBAKONAM.
2 DO THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THANJAVUR AT KUMBAKONAM. 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KUMBAKONAM EAST POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DISTRICT. +1. CC to M/S.R.JOHN SATHYAN Advocate SR.No. 33690. TS/26.06.2015/2P -6C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.11641 of 2015 Date :25/06/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/