Chithirai Maharajan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Fourteenth day of February Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.2310 of 2018 CHITHIRAI MAHARAJAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.2 Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SATHANKULAM POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT (CRIME NO.27/2018) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.P.T.RAMESH RAJA Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.ROBINSON, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner/A2, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offence punishable under Section 379 I.P.C. in Crime No.27 of 2018, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on 26.01.

2018, the defacto complainant's dauther went to Anganwadi Centre, after returning from the Anganwadi Centre, the defacto complainant noted that two bangles were found missing from his daugher. Hence, case has been registered for the above said offence. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person, he has been falsely implicated, further added that he has not committed any offence as alleged, and pleads for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate(Criminal Side) appearing for the State submitted that there are totally two accused in this case. The petitioner herein is arrayed as A2. The properties, which were stolen away during the time of occurrence had been recovered. There is no previous case is pending against the petitioner. According to him, investigation is still pending.

5.The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side are considered. The petitioner is the first offender. According to prosecution, the property which was stolen away during the time of occurrence was recovered through another accused, thereby, in order to complete the investigation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary. So, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 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, Sathankulam, 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 until further orders.

(i) 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/- 14/02/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SATHANKULAM 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SATHANKULAM POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.P.T.RAMESH RAJA Advocate SR.No.2491

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.2310 of 2018 Date :14/02/2018 SMA/RR-CSL/SAR-2/16.02.2018:3P/6c