Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/3286/2015allowed

Nathan v. The Inspector Of Police

2015-02-24Honourable Mr Justice P. N. Prakash2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Fourth day of February Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.3286 of 2015 1 NATHAN 2 TAMIL SELVAN ..PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2 Vs.

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VAIGAI DAM POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT.

CR. NO. 86/2015.

..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.R.MURUGAPPAN Advocate For Respondent : Mr.A.P.BALASUBRAMANI, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324 & 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.86 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to wordy quarrel, the petitioners assaulted the defacto complainant.

3. It is represented by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that the injured has been discharged from hospital and there is no previous case against the petitioners.

4. 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, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Andipatti, Theni District, on condition that the petitioners shall execute 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioners shall stay at Dindigul and report before the Dindigul Town Polie Station twice a day at 10:30 a.m. and 06:30 p.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[b] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[d] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

[e] The Inspector of Police concerned, is directed to send compliance report to the office of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), whether these petitioners are complying with the order or not. sd/- 24/02/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ANDIPATTI, THENI DISTRICT. 2 -do-thro'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THENI. 3 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI. 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAIGAI DAM POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT. 5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DINDIGUL TOWN POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL. +1. CC to M/S.R.MURUGAPPAN Advocate SR.No.8398 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.3286 of 2015 Date :24/02/2015 PBK 25/02/2015 ::2P-7C:

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