Mohammed Siddik v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Third day of November Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.20811 of 2015 1 MOHAMMED SIDDIK 2 ABDUL RAHUMAN ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE AIRPORT POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO. NOT KNOWN OF 2015) ... RESPONDENT(S) / COMPLAINANT(S) For Petitioner : M/S V.PALANI Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN, Government 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 accused, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 365 r/w 511 of IPC, in Crime No.438 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that one Varusai Mohammed, S/o.Syed Hanifa was working under one Doctor viz., Eliyas Mohamed Ibrahim at Singapore. He show the identity card of accused No.1's wife and he borrowed money from the above said doctor and he did not repay the amount.

Therefore, he gave a complaint before the Singapore police and the FIR has been registered by the Singapore Police. The first petitioner came to know that Varusai Mohamed came to India and they have enquired about the amount with Varusai Mohamed. While so, brother-in-law of Varusai Mohammed, who is the defacto complainant, gave a false complaint against the the petitioner. Subsequently, after filing this petition, the respondent police has registered a case in Cr.No.438 of 2015. 3.According to the petitioners, they are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence and pray for anticipatory bail.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that already accused Nos.3,5 to 9 were arrested and at this stage, if the petitioners are released on bail, they will tamper the witnesses and hamper evidences.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5.Considering the above gravity of offence and also considering fact that the other co-accused were arrested and they are still in custody and

hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6.Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

sd/- 03/11/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AIRPORT POLICE STATION,TRICHY DISTRICT.

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECTUOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.20811 of 2015 Date :03/11/2015 CSL/SKS-SK/17.11.2015 2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/