P. Muruganantham v. The State Rep By Ins Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Fifth day of October Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.16529 of 2015 1 P. MURUGANANTHAM 2 V.R. PATTABIRAMAN 3 R.SIVA GURUNATHAN ... PETITIONER(S) / ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs THE STATE REP BY INS OF POLICE TALUK POLICE STATION DINDIGUL DISTRICT DINDIGUL (CRIME NOT KNOWN/2015) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S R.M.ANBUNIDHI Advocate For Respondent : M/S.S.Prabha Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as accused, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 294(b), 341, 384 and 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.

880 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.According to the defacto complainant, the accused by coercion obtained a deed of promise, as if he received a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- from the defacto complainant and abused the defacto complainant with filthy language and also threatened him.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in fact the petitioners are victim in this case, the Modus operandi of the defacto complainant is that by giving promise to the general public to form a public trust on the assurance that he will get financial Assistance from the Central Government, he received huge amount from the petitioners and others and therefore, he cheated them.

4.It is further submitted that the occurrence said to have taken place on 01.04.2015 but the complaint has been given after the period of five months I.e., on 20.09.2015 without giving proper explanation for the inordinate delay.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5.Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondents.

6.Considering the above fact, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dindigul and on each of them executing 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

7. The petitioners shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. sd/- 05/10/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.I, DINDIDUL.

2 DO THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DINDIDUL. 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4 THE STATE REP BY INS OF POLICE, TALUK POLICE STATION DINDIGUL DISTRICT, DINDIGUL .

+1. CC to M/S R.M.ANBUNIDHI Advocate SR.No. 58691. TS/08.10.2015/2P - 6C DP/SAR -I

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.16529 of 2015 Date :05/10/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/