Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/9196/2020ordered

Jeyasurya v. The Inspector Of Police

2020-09-08Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 08/09/2020 PRESENT The Hon'ble Mr.Justice V.BHARATHIDASAN CRL OP(MD). No.9196 of 2020

1. Jeyasurya

2. Karthick

3. Esawarapandi

4. Peter @ Anthoni John Peter ... Petitioners/Accused No.A1 to A3 & 5 Vs The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar Bazaar Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

Crime No. 293 of 2020. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : M/s.S.Ramasamy, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C.

PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No. 293 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent Police ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A1 to A3 and A5 herein were arrested on 12.08.2020 for the alleged offences under Sections 147,436,506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of TNPPDL Act.

2. The petitioners herein are arrayed as A1 to A3 and A5. The defacto complainant in this case is the Secretary of Marxist Community Party and he was provided with one two wheeler of the party and he parked the same in front of his house. On 11.08.2020 at about 3.00 a.m all the accused gathered infront of the house of the defacto complainant and criminally intimidated him and also set fire to the two wheeler of the defacto complainant. Earlier all the accused indulged in teasing a women in the temple, which was

questioned by the defacto complainant due to the same all the petitioners have involved in the above said crime. Based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant the present case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the occurrence is said to have taken place in the mid night and due to some previous enmity all the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the above case. He would also submit that even as per the First Information Report the petitioners have set fire to the seat cover of the two wheeler. He would also submit that the petitioners are in jail for nearly 25 days, hence they may be granted bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) would submit that when the defacto complainant questioned about the illegal activities of the petitioners herein they unlawfully assembled in front of the house of the defacto complainant , criminally intimidated him and also set fire to the two wheeler of the defacto complainant. He would also submit that the petitioners are having previous case and the investigation is almost completed.

5. The occurrence is said to have taken place n in the mid night and the petitioners said to have assembled in front of the defacto complainant's house and also said to have set fire to the two wheeler of the defacto complainant. It is also stated that the investigation is almost completed.

6. Taking note of the above facts and circumstances of the case and also taking into consideration the period of incarceration, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions:

7.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Virdhunagar.

i) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate/concerned court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity ii) the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m until further orders.

iii)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness. iv) the petitioners shall not abscond during trial.

v)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]. vi) If the petitioners/accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC. sd/- 08/09/2020 / 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.

1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE No.I, VIRUDHUNAGAR.

2. DO-THROUGH : THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR.

3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIRUDHUNAGAR BAZAAR POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

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

5. THE OFFICER IN-CHARGE, SUB JAIL, THIRUMANGALAM.

6. THE OFFICER IN-CHARGE, SUB JAIL, ARUPPUKOTTAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9196 of 2020 Date :08/09/2020 AAV TE/JC/SAR-IV : 08/09/2020 : 3P/7C