G. Saravanan, S/O.Ganesan v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Second day of April Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.4928 of 2019 G. SARAVANAN ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs THE STATE REP. BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, UTCHIPULI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

CR.NO.97 OF 2019 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MR.C.SENTHIL MURUGAN 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, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b) and 323 of IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act in Crime No.97 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioner abused the defacto complainant using filthy language and also assaulted the defacto complainant with hands. Thereby, the defacto complainant sustained injuries and was admitted in hospital.

On the basis of the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant, the respondent police registered a case against the petitioner. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that he is an innocent person and due to previous enmity, a false complaint has been given against him. It is a case in counter and on a complaint given by the petitioner, a case was registered against the defacto complainant. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that injured has been discharged from the hospital. However, on a complaint given by the petitioner a case in counter has been registered against the defacto complainant. He would further submit that investigation is still pending. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances and considering the fact that the injured had been discharged from the hospital , this Court is 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.II, Ramanathapuram, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.

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

(c)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

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

(e)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; (f)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

sd/- 02/04/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO II RAMANATHAPURAM 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE RAMANATHAPURAM

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, UTCHIPULI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

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

+1. CC to MR.C.SENTHIL MURUGAN Advocate SR.No.5994

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.4928 of 2019 Date :02/04/2019 MSI/PN/SAR 3/08.04.2019/3P-6C