Sumathi v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Sixteenth day of June Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.8816 of 2016 1 SUMATHI 2 RAJ KUMAR 3 MAHALAKSHMI 4 NATARAJAN @ DEVAN 5 PARVATHI @ BANU 6 KARTHI @ MATHIALAGAN 7 ARULJOTHI 8 KAMALAM 9 LALITHA ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED (RANK NOT KNOWN) Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KULITHALAI POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT.
(CR.NO. 404/2016) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S R.MURUGAPPAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.P.KANNITHEVAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as accused, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 427, 294(b), 323, 324 & 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.404 of 2016, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners damaged the fence put up by the defacto complainant and abused him in filthy language. On complaint, case has been registered for the above said offences.
3.The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. On 10.05.2016, the defacto complainant tried to misbehave with the first petitioner and her daughter and abused them in filthy language. The first petitioner gave a complaint on 11.05.2016 and the respondent police did not register the case. The first petitioner filed Crl.O.P (MD)No.8519 of 2016 for a direction to register the case before this Court. This Court, by the order, dated 10.06.2016 directed the respondent police to register the case. Due to that motive, the defacto https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
complainant has given a false complaint against the petitioners. The petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and pray for anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioners.
4.The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that already there is a civil dispute between the defacto complainant's family and petitioners' family and prayed for dismissal of the petition. 5.Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side). 6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that already civil dispute is pending and there is a case and case in counter, 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 Judicial Magistrate, Kulithalai 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 2,4 & 6 shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., until further orders and the petitioners 1,3,5,7 to 9 shall appear before the respondent police as and when required. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously.
7. 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 stands dismissed.
sd/- 16/06/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. .
AM TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,KULITHALAI 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KARUR DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KULITHALAI POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S R.MURUGAPPAN Advocate SR.No.30879 GJM/ARK/PV/SAR-I-20.6.16-2P-6C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.8816 of 2016 Date :16/06/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/