S. Govindaraj v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Ninth day of July Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.12860 and 12861 of 2015 S. GOVINDARAJ ... PETITIONER(S) / ACCUSED 1 IN OP'12860 OF 2015 1 V. PONRAMAKRISHNAN 2 R. VEDHA POTHAGAR 3 M. MAHALINGAM 4 P. VINOTH 5 K. VENKATESH KUMAR 6 P. NAGARAJ, ... Petitioner/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN IN CRL OP(MD). 12861/ 2015 Vs 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KARIAPATTI POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DT, CRIME NO.237/2015 ... RESPONDENT(S) / COMPLAINANT IN BOTH OP'S For Petitioner : M/S.L.MADHUSUDHANAN Advocate IN BOTH OP'S For Respondent : Mr.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Government Advocate(Crl.Side) IN BOTH OP'S PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as accused, in Crime No.237 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 147, 294(b), 324, 506(i), 355, 379 (NP) IPC r/w Section 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act and hence, seek anticipatory bail.
2.According to the defacto complainant, the accused who were Manager and Collecting Agents of Sri Ram Finance had entered into his shop on 02.07.2015 and damaged the articles and also stolen away Rs.52,000/- from his cash box.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the defacto complainant had borrowed Rs.13 lakhs from Sri Ram Finance, but failed to pay instalments regularly and as on date he is liable to pay Rs.4,62,000/- and while the employees had gone to the shop of the defaco complainant to collect the due they were attacked by the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
defacto complainant for which a criminal case is registered against the defacto complainant in Crime No.238 of 2015 for the offences under Section 2949b), 324 and 506(ii) IPC.
4. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the defacto complainant has political background, at whose influence the case is registered against these petitioners.
5.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the State submitted that it is a case of case and counter and the accused have stolen cash from the shop of the defacto complainant and also caused damage to his articles.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar, and on each of them executing a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum to the satisfaction to the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 06.00 p.m for a period of one week and thereafter, as and when required. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously.
7. The petitioners 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/- 09/07/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.II, VIRUDHUNAGAR 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUDHUNAGAR AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR 3 THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KARIAPATTI POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DT, 2CC to M/S.L.MADHUSUDHANAN Advocate SR.No.37531 37541 DM 13 7 15 2P 7C ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12860 and 12861 of 2015 Date :09/07/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/