Jeya Prakash v. The Iinspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 01/09/2020 PRESENT The Hon'ble Mr.Justice V.BHARATHIDASAN CRL OP(MD). No.9090 of 2020

1. Jeya Prakash

2. Sakthivel ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 & 2 Vs The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Parthibanur Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

(Crime No. 301 of 2020) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners: Mr.K.Yasar Arafath, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For an Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 301 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- Totally there are two accused in this case. The petitioners, who are arrayed as Accused No.1 and 2, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 341, 294(b), 323 and 379 of IPC, in Crime No.301 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the while the defacto complainant was riding motorcycle, the petitioners waylaid the defacto complainant and also quarreled with him and pushed him down and at that time, the defacto complainant's chain was missing. Hence, the present complaint.

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the defacto complainant was riding the motorcycle in a speedy manner, which was questioned by the petitioner, due to which, there was a wordy quarrel between them. He further submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that petitioners waylaid the defacto complainant and also quarreled with him and pushed him down and at that time, the defacto complainant's chain was missing. Hence, the crime has been registered.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the allegation against the petitioners that they questioned the rash and speedy driving of the defacto complainant and there is no other serious allegation against the petitioners, hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 7.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or their appearance, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi,Ramanathapuram District, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

(a)the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b)the petitioners shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

(d)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(e)the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(f)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the

learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and;

(g)if the accused/petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

sd/- 01/09/2020 / TRUE COPY / / /2020 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

TO

1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PARAMAKUDI, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

2. DO-THROUGH : THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARTHIBANUR POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9090 of 2020 Date :01/09/2020 VSG TE/AKM/SAR-II : 04/09/2020 : 3P/5C