Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/555/2018ordered

K. Shanmuga v. The Inspector Of Police

2018-01-29Honourable Mr Justice R. Pongiappan3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Ninth day of January Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL OP(MD) No.555 of 2018 1 K. SHANMUGA PRIYA 2 D. NARMATHA ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED Nos.3 & 4 Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CBCID, NAGARCOIL, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT , (CRIME NO.60/2008) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioners : Mr.S.BALAJI Advocate For Respondent :Mr.A.ROBINSON, Govt. 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 No.3 & 4, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 409 and 420 of IPC, in Crime No.60 of 2018, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 28.07.2006, the defacto complainant joined as a member of the society and had applied for loan of Rs.8,00,000/-. For which on the same day he deposited a sum of Rs.2,19,560/- as security deposit into the society and produced necessary documents as instructed by the accused persons. Then on 21.06.2007, the 3rd accused gave a cheque for a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- in favour of the defacto complainant, but the same was returned by the bank as insufficient funds and again a cheque was issued on 11.11.2007 and the same was also returned for the same reason. Thereafter, the accused persons assured that they would give the amount on 25.08.2008, but they did not paid any amount as agreed by them. Hence, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that there is no specific overt act attributed against the

petitioners.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that after completing the investigation, the charge sheet has been filed and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.139 of 2017 by the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Nagercoil.

5.The submissions made by the learned counsel on either side are considered. The case pertaining to this petition was registered in the year 2008. Now, after completing the investigation charge sheet has been filed and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.139 of 2017 by the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Nagercoil. Accordingly, the question of custodial interrogation does not arise. 6.Taking all the above said aspect into consideration, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions. Accordingly, they are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nagercoil, on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.

(i) the petitioners shall report before the Judicial Magistrate, daily at 10.00 a.m. for a period of one week and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

(ii) the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. (iii) the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

(iv) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners shall stand automatically cancelled and the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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/- 29/01/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NAGERCOIL, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT AT NAGERCOIL 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CBCID, NAGARCOIL, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT , 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.S.BALAJI Advocate SR.No. 1487 TM JAM/07/02/2018/CM-VR/ SAR 1 /3P-6C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.555 of 2018 Date :29/01/2018