Rajan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Sixth day of March Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.3432 of 2015 RAJAN ... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs THE STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION, TUTICORIN DT, CRIME NO.2/2015 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.N.ANANDAKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : Mr.A.P.BALASUBRAMANI, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 18.02.2015, for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, in Crime No.2 of 2015, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is working as Commercial Inspector in Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and that he had demanded a sum of Rs.4,900/- for giving service connection. On the complaint lodged by the de facto complainant, a trap was laid and this petitioner was apprehended on 18.02.2015 and remanded to judicial custody on the same day and he is in incarceration since then.

3. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thoothukudi and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police twice a day daily at 10.30 a.m. and 6.30p.m. for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ [b] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[c] the petitioner 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed 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]. The Inspector of Police concerned is directed to send compliance report to the office of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor whether the petitioner is complying with the order or not.

sd/- 06/03/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THOOTHUKUDI 2 -DO-THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TUTICORIN DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION, TUTICORIN DT, 4 THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE SUB-JAIL, TUTICORIN 5 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.N.ANANDAKUMAR Advocate SR.No.10901

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.3432 of 2015 Date :06/03/2015 NA/06/03/2015/P2/7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/