Praveen Kumar v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Ninth day of October Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD) No.18743 of 2018 AND CRL MP(MD) No.8739 of 2018 1 PRAVEEN KUMAR 2 KARTHIKPRIAYA 3 BALASUBRAMANIAN 4 VALARMATHI ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No.1 to 4 Vs STATE THROUGH, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VATHALAI POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT.
CRIME NO.NOT KNOWN OF 2018 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT S.SANTHOSH @ SANTHOSHKUMAR ... PETITIONER/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IN CRL MP(MD)No.8739 of 2018 For Petitioners : MR.B.JAMEEL ARASU, Advocate For Respondent : MR.V.NEELAKANDAN, Additional Public Prosecutor For Intervenor : MR.S.MUTHUKRISHNAN, Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners/A1 to A4 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 294(b) and 506(i) of I.P.C. in Crime No.177 of 2018, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are doing Car dealing business under the name and style of Super Cars and the defacto complainant is a money lender and in order to develop their business, the petitioners borrowed a sum of Rs.60 lakhs in various dates and the defacto complainant collected unfilled blank cheques and non judicial stamp papers for the purpose of security. However, the petitioner did not settle the amount to the defacto complaiant
as per their promise and when the defacto complainant insisted for repayment, the petitioners threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that already the defacto complainant filed complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument as against the petitioners. 4.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would submit that the investigation is pending. 4.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, since already proceedings under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act is pending as against the petitioners, 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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Musiri, Trichy 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 petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the conditions stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.
5..The petitioners 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 shall stand dismissed.
sd/- 29/10/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MUSIRI, TRICHY DISTRICT.
2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY DISTRICT.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VATHALAI POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to MR.B.JAMEEL ARASU, Advocate SR.No.20574
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.18743 of 2018 AND CRL MP(MD) No.8739 of 2018 Date :29/10/2018 PK/PN/SAR-1/01.11.2018 : 3P/6C