Raman @ Ramanathan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.03.2023 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA 1.Raman @ Ramanathan 2.Karunanithi 3.Annathurai 4.Alaguraj 5.Muthukumar

...Petitioners/Accused Nos.1,2,3,5&6

-vsThe State represented by The Inspector of Police, K.Pudupatti Police Station, Pudukottai District.

(Cr.No.336 of 2020)

...Respondent/complainant

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Cr.No.336 of 2020 on the file of the respondent Police.

For Petitioners : Mr.E.Balasubramanian For Respondent : M/S.A.Albert James, Government Advocate(Crl.side) ****

O R D E R

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 448, 294(b), 323, 427 and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.336 of 2020 on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution, as per the de-facto complainant, Santhi, is that due to business motive, the accused have trespassed into her house and abused and assaulted her with wooden log and iron rod and also caused damage to her car bearing Reg.No.TN-63-Y-9444. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and a false complaint has been given. He would also submit that the petitioners are arrayed as A1, A2, A3, A5 and A6. He would further submit that there was a previous enmity between the A1 and the de-facto complainant on 1/3

account of business transactions and thereby, a false complaint has been given. He would further submit that the incident had happened during 2020 and that an exaggerated and a false complaint has been given against the petitioners. He would also submit that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions, that may be imposed on them. He would further submit that co-accused in this case have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.O.P(MD)No.23034 of 2023 vide order dated 02.01.2023. 4.The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) would submit that that the accused have trespassed into the de-facto complainant's house and they abused and attacked the de-facto complainant and also caused damage to her car. Hence, he would oppose to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5.Heard and perused the materials available on record. Taking into consideration the facts and submissions and the co-accused have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

6.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 on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Thirumayam, Pudukottai District, on condition that the petitioners shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each 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, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks thereafter every Saturday at 10.30 am until further orders.

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

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

[e] 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 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]. 2/3

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

sd/- 03/03/2023 / TRUE COPY / /03/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

cm TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUMAYAM, PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT. 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PUDUKOTTAI.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, K.PUDUPATTI POLICE STATION, PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT.

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1 CC to M/s.E.BALASUBRAMANIAN, Advocate ( SR-3366[I] dated 03/03/2023 )

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.4212 of 2023 Date :03/03/2023 RK/SAR-4(14/03/2023) 3P/6C 3/3