Marimuthu @ Moorthy v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Tenth day of January Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.381 of 2018 MARIMUTHU @ MOORTHY ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED Rank Not Known Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE FORT POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT.
(CR. NO. 1490/2017) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : Mr.R.MANIMARAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S S.BHARATHI, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner/Rank not known, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 406 and 379 of I.P.C., in Crime No.1490 of 2017, seeking relief to grant of anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant namely Senthil Murugan lodged a complaint stating that he purchased a machine for installing the internet cables from the first accused. After the purchase, the machine made some trouble, so he handed over the same to a workshop at Trichy, wherein, it was repaired. Thereafter, the defacto complainant engaged the accused no.2, to carry the machine through lorry and drop the same to Karaikudi, but the accused no.1 had taken the lorry along with the machine and kept in his custody. Hence, the defacto complainant gave a complaint before the respondent police as against the petitioner. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is a load man and his role is only lift and drop the machine from the lorry and he engaged by them to carry the load occasionally for the daily wage basis. He further submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner is not having any previous case. Accordingly, he prays for anticipatory bail.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that the stolen property, which was misappropriated and was recovered through some other accused. He further submitted that Investigation is not completed.
5.Considering the submission made by either side, it is disclose that the offence under Sections 406 and 379 of I.P.C has been registered against the petitioner.
According to the prosecution of the case, the property which was stolen by the petitioner was recovered. Therefore, custodial interrogation is not necessary for completing the investigation. Admittedly, the petitioner is not having any previous case. Therefore, the reasons stated above, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to 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 No.I, Trichy, 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, till the surrender of first accused in this case and 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/- 10/01/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.1, TRICHY 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE FORT POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.R.MANIMARAN Advocate SR.No.734 JAM/17/01/2018/CM-VR/ SAR 3 / 3P-6C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.381 of 2018 Date :10/01/2018