Senthil v. The Insepector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Sixth day of October Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.19207 of 2015 1 SENTHIL 2 THANGARAJ 3 RAMESH ..PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 2 TO 4 Vs.

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KEERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.151 OF 2015 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioners : M/S R.MAHESWARAN Advocate For Respondent : MRS.S.PRABHA, 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 A2 to A4 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for an alleged offence punishable under Section 174 of Cr.P.C @ 306 of IPC in Crime No.151 of 2015, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. According to the de facto complainant that her husband viz., Ramesh had borrowed money from the the petitioners, for his business purpose and on 27.09.2015 at 10.00 am, the accused came to their house and demanded repayment of Rs.2,00,000/- and also assaulted the husband of the de facto complainant and therefore, he committed suicide by consuming Poisson.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the husband of the de facto complainant had borrowed money from many persons to the tune of Rs.8,00,000/-, but, failed to repay the amount. It is further submitted that the first accused had purchased a Tractor from the deceased about two years ago and paid Rs.2,00,000/- to the financier, for getting original RC Book and at that the time the deceased has agreed to pay back the amount, but, when it was asked by the first accused, they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the first accused was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. The first petitioner is the brother of the first accused and the petitioners 2 and 3 are friends of A2 and they have been falsely roped in this case.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that this case was registered only on 27.09.2015 and the investigation is at initial state.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alangudi 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 am until further orders. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously.

6. 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/- 06/10/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ALANGUDI.

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

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

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KEERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT.

+1. CC to M/S R.MAHESWARAN Advocate SR.No.58992 Akm/08.10.2015 /2p-6c/

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.19207 of 2015 Date :06/10/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/