Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/1971/2015dismissed

S.Sekar v. The Inspector Of Police

2015-03-17Honourable Mr Justice P. N. Prakash2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Seventeenth day of March Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.1971 of 2015 S.SEKAR ..PETITIONER/ACCUSED (RANK NOT KNOWN) V.JAYAKUMAR ..INTERVENOR Vs.

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI DISTRICT, MADURAI.

(CRIME NO.NOT KNOWN/2015) ..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.M.A.PALANISAMY Advocate For Respondent : Mr.A.P.BALASUBRAMANI, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.V.ILLANCHEZIAN, Advocate 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 406 and 420 IPC, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the State.

3. This petition has filed showing the Crime Number as "Not Known" and therefore, this Court granted interim anticipatory bail to this petitioner on 05.02.2015 with a direction to appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for two weeks.

4. Mr.A.John Britto, Inspector of Police, DCB, Madurai District has filed a detailed status report before this court, narrating the steps that were taken by him during the court of enquiry.

5. On 25.02.2015, learned counsel for the petitioner and the defacto complainant submitted before this court that the parties have arrived at a mutual settlement by virtue of which the accused has given a sum of RS.1,00,000/- to the defacto complainant and has also given a cheque for Rs.10,00,000/- dated 09.03.2015. Therefore, this court extended the interim anticipatory bail upto 11.03.2015 in order to await the outcome of the clearance of the cheque.

6. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant submitted that the cheque dated 09.03.2015, when presented, was dishonored. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought further time.

7. This Court is of the view that sufficient time has been given to the petitioner and no further time can be granted. Under such circumstances, this criminal original petition is dismissed. sd/- 17/03/2015 / TRUE COPY / https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, MADURAI DISTRICT, MADURAI.

2 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S.N.SATHEESH KUMAR, Advocate SR.No.12700 +1CC to M/s.V.ILLANCHEZIAN, Advocate in SR.13140 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.1971 of 2015 Date :17/03/2015 PBK 20/03/2015 ::2P-5C:

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