Ravichandran v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Nineteenth day of August Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.15254 of 2016 RAVICHANDRAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED No.5 Vs State Rep.by THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ORATHANADU POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DISTRICT.
(CRIME NO. 35/2009) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.R. MURALI Advocate For Respondent : Mr.P.Kannithevan Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner who is arrayed as accused no.5 was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 28.07.2016 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 341, 323, 355 of IPC r/w. 3(i)(x) of SC/ST Act in Crime No.35 of 2009, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 20.01.2009 the petitioner along with other accused attacked the defacto complainant and abused him by using his Caste name and also threatened him with dire consequences. On complaint, a case has been registered for the above said offences.
3. The case of the petitioner is that a case against the accused persons 2 to 4 ended in acquittal. A1 filed Crl.O.P.No.9120 of 2016 to quash the FIR and the same was allowed, on considering the fact that all the accused turned hostile. 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. Due to his avocation he went to Singapore and on his arrival on 28.07.2016, he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody and prays for enlarging the petitioner on bail.
4. Heard the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side). 5.Considering the fact that the co-accused are acquitted and FIR is quashed and the petitioner is in judicial custody from 28.07.2016, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to the following conditions: (i) the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Pattukkottai.
(ii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court on all future hearing dates without fail.
(iii) 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) 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 petitioner 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 petitioner is complying with the condition or not. sd/- 19/08/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PATTUKKOTTAI 2 -do-thro THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THANJAVUR DISTRICT AT KUMBAKONAM 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ORATHANADU POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DISTRICT.
4 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, SUB JAIL, PATTUKOTTAI 5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S.R. MURALI Advocate SR.No.45928 sm:GSV-PM:SAR (W):19.08.2016:2P/7C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.15254 of 2016 Date :19/08/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/