Thiruvarulrajan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Ninth day of October Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.19091 of 2015 THIRUVARULRAJAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE T. KALLUPATTI POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT.

(CR.NO. 180/2015) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S M.KALA MURUGAPPAN Advocate For Respondent : MRS.S.PRABHA, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as the sole accused, in Crime No.180 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.08.2015, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 506(i), 448, 419 and 420 of I.P.C., r/w Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, 1998 and hence, seeks bail. 2.According to the de-facto complainant, the petitioner along with three other persons trespassed into her house acting as Intelligence Bureau Officer and criminally intimidated the de-facto complainant and also abused her.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the de-facto complainant is none other than the grandmother of the wife of the petitioner and there is a property dispute between them. It is further submitted that on the basis of the complaint of the de-facto complainant, the respondent has registered the case against four persons, however after investigation, 3 persons name have been deleted in this case, which shows that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case.

4.The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is working as an Assistant Executive Engineer in Electricity Board at Vathirairuppu and the only intention of the de-facto complainant is that the petitioner is to be dismissed from his service. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that the respondent has originally registered the case against four persons and at present, the petitioner alone is arrayed as an accused in this case.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his 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 Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur, Madurai District and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police as and when required for interrogation. sd/- 09/10/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PERAIYUR, MADURAI DISTRICT.

2 -DO- THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE MADURAI.

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

4 THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, SUB-JAIL, TIRUMANGALAM.

5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE T. KALLUPATTI POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT.

+1. CC to M/S M.KALAMURUGAPPAN Advocate SR.No.59870 akm/09.10.2015 /2p-7c/

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.19091 of 2015 Date :09/10/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/