Cinnapandi @ Pandi v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Eighth day of November Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP(MD) No.19049 of 2018 1.CINNAPANDI @ PANDI 2.ALAGURANI 3.RAJARAM 4.ARUN ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED NO 2,4,5 & 6 Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SELLUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI CITY.
CRIME NO.1683/2018 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioners : Mr.R.BALAMURUGANANTHAM Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners herein, who are the Accused Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6 in Crime No.1683 of 2018, for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 307 and 506 (ii) I.P.C., have filed this Criminal Original Petition.
2. The contention of the petitioners is that on 14.10.2018, the third petitioner's brother viz., Hari Raja was murdered, for which, the case in Crime No.1683 of 2018, has been registered. It is further contended that the third petitioner's father viz., Periyapandi @ Ramalingam, had purchased a vacant site from the defacto complainant's husband, which was not to the liking of the defacto complainant's sons viz., Mayandi and Sasi, who often used to pick up quarrel with the petitioners and their family members. The murder of Hari Raja was suspected to be at the hands of the de-facto complainant's sons and their accomplice. On 14.10.2018, at about 12.00 A.M., the petitioners said to have attacked the de-facto complainant and her husband. Hence the above case.
3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) admits about the murder of Hari Raja on 14.10.2018, who is none other than the brother of the third petitioner and son of the first and third https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
accused persons in the above case, due to which, the petitioners and others have said to have assaulted the de-facto complainant and her husband. It is also submitted that the de-facto complainant had been discharged from the hospital and her husband is said to have been attacked only by hands and and there are no specific injuries.
4. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions.
5. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai, Madurai District, on condition that each petitioners shall execute 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 respondent police or the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police daily for a period of ten days between 4.00 p.m and 5.00 p.m and thereafter, as and when required, for interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the conditions stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C., scrupulously.
6. The petitioners 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/- 08/11/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO II, MADURAI.
2.THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT. 3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SELLUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI CITY.
4.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+2. CC to Mr.R.BALAMURUGANANTHAM Advocate SR.No.21261
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.19049 of 2018 Date :08/11/2018 MS/MMS/SAR.2/12.11.2018/2P/7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/