Ramakrishnan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Sixth day of May Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.8510 of 2015 RAMAKRISHNAN ..PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.3 Vs.

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THATTARMADAM POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DIST.

CR.NO.115/2015 ..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 petitioner/A3 apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. and Sections 4 and 5(a) of Tamilnadu Price Schemes (Prohibition) Act, 1979 in Crime No.115 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the first and second accused have conducted unauthorised lottery scheme.

3.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is neither partner nor agent of of the Chit Fund and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and hence, he prays for anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that no previous case is pending against the petitioner. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Sattankulam, Tuticorin District, and on 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 Magistrate concerned and on condition that each of the petitioner shall execute 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 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 petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.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 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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 a compliance report to the office of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) as to whether the petitioner is complying with the order or not.

sd/- 06/05/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SATHANKULAM, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT. 2 -DO-THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THOOTHUKUDI. 3 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI. 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THATTARMADAM POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DIST.

+1. CC to M/S.R.MURUGAPPAN Advocate SR.No.25132 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.8510 of 2015 Date :06/05/2015 PBK/AMF 07/05/2015 ::2P-6C:

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