T.Thenmohan, v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Thirtieth day of January Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice A.M.BASHEER AHAMED CRL OP(MD) No.603 of 2017 T.THENMOHAN, ... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO 2 Vs State Rep.by THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOVILPATTI EAST POLICE STATION, CR.NO.

36/2017, TUTICORIN DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner :Mr.V.Karthirvelu,Senior Counsel for M/S.K.PRABHU Advocate For Respondent : P.Kandasamy,Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : M/s C.Bhanumathi PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.1 apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323, 506(ii) and 307 I.P.C in Cr.No.36 of 2017 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondents states that there are totally six accused in this case including one named accused and five others. The petitioner is arrayed as A-1 and due to professional motive, the petitioner along with other accused assaulted the defacto complainant, who is also a practising advocate and no one sustained injury in the alleged occurrence.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner herein is a named accused in this case and due to professional motive, the petitioner is implicated in this case on the false ground and the defacto complainant is also a practising advocate and having three cases and also having three CSRs in the very same Police Station and the injured person was treated as out patient in this case.

4.The learned counsel for the intervenor also states that the petitioner herein is also a practising advocate and he is also having previous case.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5.Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the defacto complainant and the petitioner herein are practising advocates and the petitioner herein is the President of the Bar Association, Kovilpatti and no one sustained injury, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District and on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

7. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

sd/- 30/01/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, KOVILPATTI,TUTICORIN DISTRICT.

2.Do Through THE CHIEF JUDICAL MAGISTRATE, TUTICORIN DISTRICT.

3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOVILPATTI EAST POLICE STATION, 4.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.K.PRABHU Advocate SR.No.4761 vs ms/msm.jm/1.2.2017/2p.6c

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.603 of 2017 Date :30/01/2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/