← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/9841/2015dismissed

Sarayakadai Jeyaganesan v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

2015-06-04Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Fourth day of June Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.9841 of 2015 1 SARAYAKADAI JEYAGANESAN 2 GANESAN 3 MURUGESAN 4 MURUGAN ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.3 TO 6 Vs STATE THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE VASUDEVANALLUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. CRIME NO.164 OF 2015 ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.R.RAMASAMY Advocate For Respondent : M/S.K.V.RAJARAJAN,Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as A3 to A6, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 153(A), 295, 506(i) I.P.C r/w Section 3 of Tamil Nadu Public Property Damages and Loss Act in Crime No. 164 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused have demolished the temple constructed by the defacto complainant and his relative by using JCB and caused damage worth about Rs.1,20,000/-. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ implicated in this case.

4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) submitted that the petitioners have taken law into their hands and demolished the building of the defacto complainant causing damage worth Rs.1,20,000/-. It is further submitted that the accused 1 and 2 were arrested and they are still in judicial custody. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) further submitted that the third accused is having one previous case and the fourth accused is having two previous cases.

5. Considering the nature of allegation this Court is of the view that the petitioners are not entitled for anticipatory bail. Hence, this petition is dismissed.

sd/- 04/06/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 2.THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE VASUDEVANALLUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. RL/3C - 9/6/2015

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9841 of 2015 Date :04/06/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/