Muniyasamy, v. The Inspector Of Police,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Seventh day of November Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.15083 of 2017 MUNIYASAMY, ... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAMUTHI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.
(CRIME NO.353 OF 2017) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.R.BABU JAGANATH Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN Government Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as Sole Accused, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 188, 341 and 353 of I.P.C., in Crime No.353 of 2017, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that, on 30.10.2017, the petitioner parked his two wheeler, namely, Hero Honda Splendor bearing registration No.TN-65-AY-2443 in the middle of the road at the time of celebrating Thevar Jeyanthi near Pasumpon Village. In order to maintain law and order and to regulate traffic, the defacto complainant instructed the petitioner to move the vehicle from the said place. However, the petitioner refused to abide by the direction of the defacto complainant. Therefore, there was a wordy quarrel arose between them and thereby, the petitioner tried to assault the defacto complainant. Hence, the defacto complainant lodged the present complaint before the respondent police who is also a disciplinary force.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the
petitioner is also working as disciplinary force, however, the defacto complainant lodged a false compliant against him.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the State submitted that investigation has almost been completed.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), I am 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, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kamuthi, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.
25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: (i) the petitioner shall report before the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram, weekly twice I.e., on every Monday and Friday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; (ii) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
(iv) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(v) the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail;
(vi) 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 and the anticipatory bail granted stands cancelled automatically. sd/- 07/11/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
mrn TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KAMUTHI 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAMUTHI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT. 4 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, RAMANATHAPURAM 5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S.R.BABU JAGANATH Advocate SR.No.33926 GJM/CM/SAR-I-13.11.2017-3P-7C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.15083 of 2017 Date :07/11/2017