P.Ganapathy v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Eighth day of January Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.180 of 2015 P.GANAPATHY ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs THE STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE MELAPALAYAM POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. CRIME NO.897/2012 ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.M.MARAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.A.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN 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 offences punishable under Sections 392 IPC in Crime No.897 of 2012, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on 06.07.2012 the petitioner, along with other accused, snatched the gold chain of the defacto complainant.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the coaccused has been arrested and released on bail. 4.The learned Government Advocate (criminal side) submitted that the property has been recovered after the arrest of A1.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the case is of the year 2012 and the property has been recovered in this case and the co-accused has been arrested and released on bail, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 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 No.V, Tirunelveli, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

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 shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m. and 6.30 p.m for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation. [b] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[d] 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 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/- 08/01/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V TIRUNELVELI 2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT 3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE MELAPALAYAM POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. +1. CC to M/S.M.MARAN Advocate SR.No.1208 RL/6 C- 12/1/2015

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.180 of 2015 Date :08/01/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/