Yosoppu v. The Sub Inspector Of Police,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Ninth day of March Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice J.NISHA BANU CRL OP(MD) Nos.2559 and 2560 of 2017 1 YOSOPPU 2 RUKKUPANDI 3 NAGAPANDI 4 VETHAMANI 5 KALIDOSS 6 BALAMOHAN 7 JOHN 8 RAJADURAI 9 PETER 10 RAJKUMAR ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No.21 to 30 in CRL OP(MD) No.2559 of 2017 1 NAGESHWARAN 2 CHITRAVEL 3 MARISAMY 4 MUNIYAMMAL 5 SELVAKUMAR 6 ALAGAMMAL 7 BALAKRISHNAN 8 MARISELVAM@MARISAMY 9 SEEKAMANI 10 PANDIAMMAL 11 KALIYAMMAL 12 MANIKANDAN 13 SIGAPURAJA 14 VIVEKANANTHARAJA 15 PONNUTHAI ...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1,2,4 to 7,9,10,11,13 to 18,20 in CRL OP(MD) No.2560 of 2017 Vs THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAMUTHI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT CRIME NO.64/2017 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT IN BOTH THE PETITIONS For Petitioner : MR.A.UTHAYAKUMAR Advocate IN BOTH THE PETITIONS For Respondent : MR.P.KANNITHEVAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) IN BOTH THE PETITIONS
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are accused, in Crime No.64 of 2017 on the file of the respondent police, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 294(b), 427, 506(ii) and 379(NH) of IPC and hence, seek anticipatory bail.
2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) for the respondent/State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that with regard to land dispute the petitioners removed the fencing of disputed land and threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences. 4.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it was a case in counter case and in the counter case, the accused was arrested and he was in custody. He further submitted as far as the present case is concerned, the injured has been discharged from the hospital.
5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kamuthi, Ramanathapuram District, and on each of them executing 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the male petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. Until further orders and the female petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.
6.The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.
sd/- 09/03/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KAMUTHI, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT 3 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAMUTHI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+2. CC to M/S.A.UTHAYAKUMAR Advocate SR.Nos.13423, 13424
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) Nos.2559 and Date :09/03/2017 SMA/SKN-RSK/SAR-3/13.03.2017:3P/7C