Muthuraj v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Nineteenth day of February Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.2570 of 2019 MUTHURAJ ... PETITIONER / 1st ACCUSED Vs STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MEIGNANAPURAM POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO.14/2019) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : Mr.C.SUSIKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 324 & 506(ii) IPC in Cr.No.14 of 2019, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner committed theft sand from the defacto complainant's sister land, which was questioned by the defacto complainant and thereby, the petitioner assaulted the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he is an innocent person. However, on instructions, he would submit that the petitioner is ready to deposit any amount to the District Mineral Foundation Trust without prejudice to his rights.

4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the State submitted that the vehicle was seized by the respondent police and there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. He further submitted that if the person is caught with illegal sand in the mining area, he has to be directed to deposit the conditional amount to the credit of Crime number. However, in view of formation

of District Mineral Foundation Trust in each district, the amount may be deposited to the credit of the said Trust for rehabilitation in the areas affected by illegal sand mining. 5.In view of the rehabilitation undertaken by the State Government under the Tamil Nadu District Mineral Foundation Rules, 2017, and in order to curb the illegal sand mining activities and also considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is directed to make a non refundable deposit of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the credit of the concerned District Mineral Foundation Trust, without prejudice to his rights and contentions. This amount so deposited shall be utilised by the Trust for rehabilitation works.

6.It is made clear that the deposit of the amount by the petitioner to the Trust would not amount to admission of guilt. The trial Court shall deal with the case independently on merits without reference to the amount deposited at the stage of anticipatory bail. 7.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

8.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, Sathankulam, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

(a)the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b)the petitioner shall make a non refundable deposit of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) through demand draft to the credit of the Chairman/District Collector, District Mineral Foundation Trust of the concerned District, without prejudice to his defence before the trial Court and the learned Judicial Magistrate, after perusing the challan/ receipt, shall accept the sureties furnished by the petitioner;

(c)the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

(d)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness

either during investigation or trial;

(e)the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(f)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, 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]; and; (g)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

sd/- 19/02/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SATHANKULAM.

THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MEIGNANAPURAM POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.

4 ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI.

COPOY TO THE CHAIRMAN/DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DISTRICT MINERAL FOUNDATION TRUST, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.

+1. CC to MR.C.SUSIKUMAR Advocate SR.No.3429 PS/JC/SAR-2/04.03.2019/3P/7C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.2570 of 2019 Date :19/02/2019