Umesh @ Sivaraj v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Fourth day of August Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.13853 of 2016 UMESH @ SIVARAJ ... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs THE STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE MEIGNANAPURAM POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.
(CRIME NO.120 OF 2016) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.K.SUDALAIYANDI Advocate For Respondent : M/S.P.KANNITHEVAN, Government Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for an alleged offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 323 and Section 4 of Women Harassment Act in Crime No.120 of 2016, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that due to civil dispute, the petitioner attacked the defacto complainant and abused him in filthy language. On complaint, a case has been registered against the petitioner.
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 and his name has been falsely implicated in this case.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that it is a simple injury and the investigation of the case is pending.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that it is a simple injury, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 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 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sathankulam and on condition that 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 report before the respondent police daily at 10.00 am until further orders.
[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 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]. 6.The Inspector of Police concerned is directed to send a compliance report to the office of the learned Government Advocate, as to whether the petitioners are complying with the condition or not.
sd/- 04/08/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE SATHANKULAM 2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT 3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE MEIGNANAPURAM POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.
+1. CC to M/S.K.SUDALAIYANDI Advocate SR.No.42018 RL/6C/2P/SK/SKN/SARI/11/8/2016
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.13853 of 2016 Date :04/08/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/