Rasu v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Seventh day of March Two Thousand and Twenty Four PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI 1 RASU 2 JEYAKODI 3 GANAGAVATHI @ GANAPATHI 4 ANNAMALAI 5 RAMADURAI 6 KALIMUTHU 7 DURAISAMY 8 VINOTH 9 MUTHU 10 ESWARAN 11 AJITH 12 VALLARASU 13 BALANDI ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 13 Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SEITHUR RURAL POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

CRIME NO. 153/2023 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner :

M/S.A.S.VAIGUNTH, Advocate For Respondent :

MR.S.MANIKANDAN, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor :

MR.G.GOMATHI SANKAR, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL UNDER SEC 438 OF CR.P.C. 1/4

PRAYER : FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRIME NO.153 OF 2023 ON THE FILE OF THE RESPONDENT POLICE.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners/A1 to A13, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 448, 427, 323, 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act in Crime No.153 of 2023, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that due to land dispute, the accused persons abused the defacto complainant's father and mother in filthy language and also threatened them. That apart, they trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and damaged household articles. They have also assaulted the defacto complainant and thereby, caused injuries. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they are innocent persons.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor would submit that already the petitioners approached the Court below for anticipatory bail in Crl.M.P.No.31 of 2024 and the same was also allowed with conditions that they should deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/-. However, the said condition was not complied with. Again, the petitioners filed anticipatory bail petition before this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2312 2/4

of 2024 and the same was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to workout remedy in the manner known to law. Without filing extension of petition before the Court below, the petitioner again, filed the present petition, which is not sustainable one. Accordingly, he prayed to dismiss the present petition. 5.It is seen that already the Court below granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners by imposing certain conditions. However, the petitioners could not comply with the conditions in time. Therefore, this Court is inclined to grant two weeks time to the petitioners to comply with the conditions imposed by the Court below. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to comply with all the conditions imposed by the Court below, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6.In the result, this criminal original petition is disposed of. sd/- 27/03/2024 / TRUE COPY / /04/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

gns TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SEITHUR RURAL POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

3/4

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1 CC to M/s.VAIGUNTH.A.S, Advocate ( SR-4043[I] dated 01/04/2024 )

ORDER

IN Date :27/03/2024 RS/GS/SAR-(04.04.2024) 4P 4C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4