Moorthy, 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.4002 of 2018 MOORTHY, ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.2 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUCHENDUR TEMPLE POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.
(CRIME NO.36 OF 2018) ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.S.MUNIYANDI Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI, Government 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 alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 307, 506(ii) I.P.C., in Crime No.36 of 2018, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that petitioner and other accused in this case, without any reason, assaulted the defacto complainant and threatened him with dire consequences. 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, without any reason assaulted the defacto complainant by using the black stone, thereby, the defacto complainant sustained simple injury and now he was discharged from the hospital after completing the treatment. Further, the co-accused in this case were arrested and released on bail. Therefore, considering the nature of offence committed by the petitioner and injury sustained by the defacto complainant and other factual aspects 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, Tiruchendur, 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. until further orders. (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.
msa TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUCHENDUR 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TUTICORIN DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUCHENDUR TEMPLE POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S.S.MUNIYANDI Advocate SR.No.4071 GJM/RR/CSL/SAR-2-19.3.18-3P-6C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.4002 of 2018 Date :14/03/2018