Soundarapandi v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Fourth day of December Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.23034 of 2015 1 SOUNDARAPANDI 2 MUTHUKUMAR ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED Nos.5 & 6 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PARAMAKUDI TALUK POLICE STATION, PARAMAKUDI, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.
(CRIME NO. 133 OF 2015) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.D.SENTHIL Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners/Accused Nos. 5 & 6, were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.12.2015 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 341, 307 of IPC r/w Section 3 of TNPPDL Act r/w Section 3 (2)(V) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, in Crime No.133 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.11.2015, while the defacto complainant was standing in the bus stand, the accused Nos.1 and 2 came to the bus stand and wordy quarrel arose between them. The complaint has been lodged before the respondent police and the matter was settled amicably. On 13.11.2015, while the defacto complainant was coming from Ramanathapuram, all the accused persons stopped the vehicle of the defacto complainant and abused him in filthy language and used caste name and damaged the vehicle of the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.5,000/-.
3. According to the petitioners, they are innocent persons and the petitioners did not use the name of the caste and the petitioners have been falsely implicated due to the wordy quarrel between the accused 1 and 2 and the defacto complainant, the names of the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that coaccused were arrested and enlarged on bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
5.The learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) on instructions submitted that the petitioners and others abused the defacto complainant in filthy language by using caste name and they damaged the two wheeler of the defacto complainant worth about Rs.5, 000/- and investigation is pending.
6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the co-accused were enlarged on bail, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their 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 of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi, and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., until further orders. sd/- 04/12/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE PARAMAKUDI 2 DO THRO THE CHEIF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT 3 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, DISTRICT PRISON RAMANATHAPURAM 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PARAMAKUDI TALUK POLICE STATION, PARAMAKUDI, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.
5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.D.SENTHIL Advocate SR.No. 69365.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.23034 of 2015 Date :04/12/2015 AM/04.12.2015/SK/SAR-I/2P/7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/