Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/19798/2015allowed

Murugan v. The Insepector Of Police

2015-10-16Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Sixteenth day of October Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) Nos.19798 and 19800 of 2015 1 MURUGAN 2 PRABHUDEVA 3 SAMPATH 4 VADIVEL ... PETITIONERS/A1 TO A4 IN CRL.OP(MD)NO.19798/2015 1 MURUGAN 2 PRABHUDEVA 3 VADIVEL 4 SAMPATH ... PETITIONERS/A1 TO A4 IN CRL.OP(MD)NO.19800/2015 Vs THE STATE REP BY THE INSEPECTOR OF POLICE `KOTTAIPATTINAM POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT, (CRIME NO.62/2015) ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT IN CRL.OP(MD)NO.19798/2015 THE STATE REP BY THE INSEPECTOR OF POLICE `KOTTAIPATTINAM POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT, (CRIME NO.59/2015) ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT IN CRL.OP(MD)NO.19800/2015 For Petitioner : M/S P.BALAKRISHNAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.S.PRABHA,Govt. Advocate ( Crl.

Side) in both the Petitions PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners in 19798 of 2015 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.62 of 2015 and hence, seek anticipatory bail. The petitioners in 19800 of 2015 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.59 of 2015 and hence, seek anticipatory bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity the petitioners tried to attack the defacto complainant and in such attack, the defacto complainant sustained injuries and got admitted in a hospital.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and the entire allegations in the complaint are false and frivolous.

4. The Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the State submitted that the injured had already been discharged from the hospital.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aranthangi, and on each of them executing a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction to the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police at 10.00 a.m 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/- 16/10/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ARANTHANGI 2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT 3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,KOTTAIPATTINAM POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT 4.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +2. CCS to M/S P.BALAKRISHNAN Advocate SR.Nos.62100&62101 RL/7C - 26/10/2015

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) Nos.19798 and 19800 of 2015 Date :16/10/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/