P. Prabhu v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Eleventh day of January Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.397 of 2018 P. PRABHU ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE FORT POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT CRIME NO. 1458/2017 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.K.SEENU RAMACHANDRAN 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 :- The petitioner/A4, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 427 and 506(i) I.P.C and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act in Crime No.1458 of 2017, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that due to wordy quarrel, the petitioner along with other accused attacked the defacto complainant and threatened her.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that at the time of wordy quarrel between the accused persons and the defacto complainant, the petitioner tried to compromise them and he is no way connected in the alleged offence and pleads for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the petitioner along with other accused assaulted the defacto complainant with hands and no one sustained injury. She further submitted that the investigation is still pending. 5.The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on

either side are considered. This case has been registered against the petitioner for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 323, 427 and 506(i) I.P.C and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act. It is seen that the petitioner along with other accused assaulted the defacto complainant with hands and no one sustained injury. Hence, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary for completing the investigation.

6.Taking note of all the abovesaid aspects into consideration and having regard to the nature of offence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner 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.

(v) 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 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/- 11/01/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

ps TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, TRICHY 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TRICHY DISTRICT 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.K.SEENU RAMACHANDRAN Advocate SR.No.610 GJM/CM/VR/SAR-I-18.1.18-3P-6C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.397 of 2018 Date :11/01/2018