Murugesan v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Seventh day of February Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.3582 of 2015 1 MURUGESAN 2 POORAJ ... PETITIONER(S) / ACCUSED Vs THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE COUTRALAM POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DT, CRIME NO.156/2014 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.P.RAJKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : M/S.A.P.BALASUBRAMANI Government Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police in Crime No.156 of 2014, on the file of the respondent police for offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 323 AND 506(i) IPC, the petitioners are now before this Court seeking Anticipatory Bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate for the respondent.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that due to wordy quarrel, it is alleged that the petitioners scolded the de-facto complainant in filthy language and attacked him.
4.It is represented that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and there is no previous case as against the petitioner. Under such circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, but with conditions.
5. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail, in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen
(15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sencottah, on 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
(a) the petitioner shall report before the Tiruchendur Temple police station every day morning and evening i.e. at 10.30 a.m. and 6.30 p.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.
[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].
[e] The Inspector of Police concerned is directed to send compliance report to the office of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) as to whether the petitioners are complying with the condition or not. sd/- 27/02/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SENCOTTAH.
2 Do - Through THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUNELVELI. 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE COUTRALAM POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.
5. THE OFFICER INCHARGE, THE TIRUCHENDUR TEMPLE POLICE STATION, TIRUNEVELI DISTRICT +1. CC to M/S.P.RAJKUMAR Advocate SR.No.9404. TS/02.03.2015/2P-7C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.3582 of 2015 Date :27/02/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/