A.Arulnithi v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 11.04.2022 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice K.MURALI SHANKAR CRL OP(MD). Nos.6085 & 6086 of 2022 A.Arulnithi
...Petitioner/ Accused No.1
(in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6085 of 2022) Sivanraj
...Petitioner/ Accused No.1
(in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6086 of 2022) Vs The State rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Pappanadu Police Station, Thanjavur District.
(Crime No.131 of 2022).
... Respondent/ Complainant (in all Ops) Rajakumari ... Petitioner / Intervener/ Defacto Complainant in Crl.MP(MD)No.4496 & 4500 of 2022 For Petitioners : Mr.V.Kannan, Advocate.
(in all Ops) For Intervenor : Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan, Advocate (in all Ops) For Respondent : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) (in all Ops) PETITIONS FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.131 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent police.
COMMON ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/accused, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 294(b), 341, 323 and 506(1) IPC and Section 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, in Crime No.131 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 1/3
2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are the sons of the defacto complainant and there existed property dispute between the parties, the petitioners had attacked the defacto complainant and abused her in filthy language. Hence, the complaint. 3.Admittedly, the petitioners are the son of the defacto complainant.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution.
5.The learned counsel for the defacto complainant would submit that the defacto complainant has been taking treatment as in-patient at Chennai.
6.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that the defacto complainant was discharged from the hospital on 26.03.2022 and that the case in counter is pending in Crime No.132 of 2022 against the defacto complainant.
7.Considering the above facts and circumstances and also the facts that there existed family dispute between the parties, that the injured was already discharged from the hospital, that except the offences under Sections 506(1) IPC and 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, all other offences are bailable in nature and that the case in counter is pending, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
8.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 of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Orathanadu, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further conditions 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 Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity.
[b]the petitioners shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.
[c]the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. 2/3
[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]. [f]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.
sd/- 11/04/2022 / TRUE COPY / / /2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ORATHANADU.
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THANJAVUR DISTRICT AT KUMBAKONAM.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PAPPANADU POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DISTRICT. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+2 CC to M/s.VR.SHANMUGANATHAN, Advocate ( SR-3269, 3270[I] dated 12/04/2022 ) +2 CC to M/s.V.KANNAN, Advocate ( SR-3350, 3351[I] dated 13/04/2022 ) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.6085 & 6086 of Date :11/04/2022 CSM MK/VR/SAR.II/19.04.2022/3P/9C 3/3