C.Nagasivarajan, v. The Inspector Of Police,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Fourteenth day of March Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.4001 of 2018 C.NAGASIVARAJAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.3 Vs STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERUNGUDI POLICE STATION, MADURAI.
IN CR.NO.37 OF 2018. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.M.KARUPPIAH, Advocate For Respondent : M/S.A.ROBINSON, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner/A3, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 341, 294B, 323, 506(ii) I.P.C., and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act, 2002, in Crime No.37 of 2018, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant has lodged a complaint before the respondent police, stating that her husband having illegal intimacy with other ladies. When the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioner and his family members abused the defacto complainant by using filthy language and assaulted her by using the hands. Hence, a case has been registered for the above said offences. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays for anticipatory bail.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the State submitted that investigation is still pending.
5. The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side are considered. It is alleged, during the time of occurrence, the petitioner and other accused in this case being the relative of the defacto complainant, abused her by using the filthy language and assaulted her by using the hands, due to which, the defacto complainant sustained simple injury. Now, she was discharged from the hospital after completing the treatment. So, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be 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 No.III, Madurai, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.
(i) the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.00 a.m. for a period of three weeks 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/- 14/03/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.III, MADURAI.
2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDCIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERUNGUDI POLICE STATION, MADURAI.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S.M.KARUPPIAH, Advocate SR.No.4050
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.4001 of 2018 Date :14/03/2018 PK/RR-CSL/SAR-2/22.03.2018 : 3P/6C