M.Rajesh@Rajesh Kumar v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Sixteenth day of July Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN CRL OP(MD) No.11784 to 11791 of 2018 M.RAJESH @ RAJESH KUMAR ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED (RANK OF ACCUSED IS NOT KNOWN) IN ALL THE PETITIONS Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SIPCOT POLICE STATION, TUTICORIN DISTRIT.

... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT IN ALL THE PETITIONS Crime NO.322 Of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD)NO.11784 OF 2018 Crime NO.321 Of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD)NO.11785 OF 2018 Crime NO.320 Of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD)NO.11786 OF 2018 Crime NO.319 Of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD)NO.11787 OF 2018 Crime NO.317 Of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD)NO.11788 OF 2018 Crime NO.318 Of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD)NO.11789 OF 2018 Crime NO.323 Of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD)NO.11790 OF 2018 Crime NO.326 Of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD)NO.11791 OF 2018 For Petitioner : Mr.KA.RAAMAKRISHNAN, Advocate IN ALL THE PETITIONS For Respondent : Mr.CHELLPANDIAN, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.A.ROBINSON, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) IN ALL THE PETITIONS PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner has filed these Criminal Original Petitions apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 188, 436 I.P.C and Section 3 and 4 of TNPPDL Act, in Crime Nos.322, 323, 326, 321, 320, 319, 317 and 318 of 2018, respectively, and he seeks anticipatory bail.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State.

3.The case was registered in connection with anti Sterlite protest that took place on 22.05.2018.

4.The learned Additional Advocate General has produced the videographs before me, in which, a woman is seen delivering a highly provocative speech instigating violence against the police. This Court is of the view that this is also will have to be considered as hate speech. The specific allegation of the prosecution is that the petitioner organised the said meeting. The petitioner is said to be having previous cases. 5.At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in all fairness, the prosecution should not implicate the petitioner in multiple cases. This stand appears to be fair. 6.The learned Additional Advocate General fairly responded by submitting that the petitioner will have to be shown as accused only in Crime No.190 of 2018 registered on the file of the SIPCOT Police Station.

It is seen that the petitioner had already obtained anticipatory bail in the said case. But, he did not surrender. Therefore, this Court treats the order already granted in favour of the petitioner as having been cancelled. The petitioner will have to necessarily surrender in connection with the said case and apply for regular bail. But, before doing so, the petitioner shall file an affidavit before this Court undertaking that he would not indulge in any such activities in future. The learned counsel for the petitioner shall draft the affidavit in this connection. The same shall also be shown to the learned Additional Advocate General and thereafter, the same shall be filed before this Court on 17.07.2018. 7.With these observations, these Criminal Original Petitions are closed.

sd/- 16/07/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SIPCOT POLICE STATION, TUTICORIN DISTRIT.

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

+1. CC to M/S.KA.RAAMAKRISHNAN Advocate SR.No.13021

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.11784 to 11791 of 2018 Date :16/07/2018 TK/MMS/ASVM/16.07.2018/3P-4C