Lawrence, v. The Inspector Of Police,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Eighth day of January Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.173 of 2018 LAWRENCE, ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED-1 Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTRICODE POLICE STATION, kanyAKUMARI DISTRICT CRIME NO.182 OF 2017. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.K.P. NARAYANA KUMAR Advocate For Respondent : M/S.S.BHARATHI, Government Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Heard both side.
2.The petitioner/A1, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 447, 379(NP), 506(i) I.P.C., in Crime No.182 of 2017, seeking relief to grant of anticipatory bail.
3.The case of the prosecution is that due to the civil dispute, the petitioner trespassed and took away 85 number of rubber sheets and other related articles. While questioning the same by the watchman, the accused persons threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the defacto complainant is none other than the brother's son of the petitioner herein and he owned the property near to the petitioner's property. Both of them obtained the property on the strength of the Will deed executed by the petitioner's parents. On 02.07.2017, the defacto complainant tried to construct the compound wall by encroaching the pathway, while questioning the same, he abused and threatened the petitioner. He further submitted that in respect of the alleged pathway dispute, 3 suits are pending before the Civil Court. Because of the interim order granted by the Civil Court, the defacto complainant not succeeded in his attempt to
construct the compound wall. So on wreck vengeance, this false compliant was made by the defacto complainant. Hence, he prays for anticipatory bail.
5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that due to the civil dispute, the petitioner trespassed and took away 85 number of rubber sheets and other related articles. While questioning the same, the accused persons threatened him with dire consequences.
6. Considering the submissions made on either side, it disclose that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are close relatives. Further they are having three civil suits before the alleged occurrence. Now the petitioner and the defacto complainant are having nearby properties. So the question of absconding, does not occur in this case. Hence, considering the previous antecedents of the petitioner and the defacto complainant, custodial interrogation is not necessary for completing the investigation. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner,with certain conditions.
Accordingly, he is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Padmanabhapuram, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: (i) the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.00 a.m. for a period of one month, thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.
(ii) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
(iii)the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
(iv) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner shall stand automatically cancelled and the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].
sd/- 08/01/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
msa/dss TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PADMANABHAPURAM 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KANYAKUMARI AT NAGERCOIL 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTRICODE POLICE STATION,KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S.K.P.NARAYANA KUMAR Advocate SR.No.330 GJM/CM/VR/SAR-I-10.1.18-3P-6C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.173 of 2018 Date :08/01/2018