Muthukrishnan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 16/09/2020 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.BHARATHIDASAN Muthukrishnan ... Petitioner/1st Accused Vs State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Sattur Taluk Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

Crime No.330/2020.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.M.Jegadeesan, 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.330/2020 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner /A1 herein was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 21.08.2020 for the alleged offences under Sections 308,304(2) IPC r/w.9(B)(1)(a) of Explosives Substances Act, 1884

2. There are totally two accused in this case and the petitioner herein is arrayed as A1. There was a fire accident in a match factory in Sattur Village, Virudhunagar District, where one person died and one person sustained injury. The case of the prosecution is that on the date of occurrence A2 who is the driver of the lorry carried match sticks to the A1 factory while it is being unloaded due to the negligence, the accident had taken place. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the owner of the match factory and while the match sticks were unloaded from the lorry due to the negligence of the 1/3

workers the fire accident had occurred. He would also submit that A2 in this case was granted bail by this Court. Hence he may be granted bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) would submit that the petitioner herein is the owner of the match factory and the accident had taken place while the match sticks were unloaded from the lorry and the petitioner herein has not provided any adequate protection to the labour while unloading the match stick, due to which accident took place, in which one person sustained injury and one person died.

5. From the perusal of the record, it is seen that the accident had taken place while unloading the match sticks from the lorry. Further no other allegation has been levelled against him to show that because of his negligence the accident had taken place. It is also now stated that A2 in this case was released on bail by this Court.

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 petitioner subject to the following conditions:

7.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Sattur 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

iii)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness. iv) the petitioner 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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]. 2/3

vi) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

sd/- 16/09/2020 / 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 NO.II, SATTUR.

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

3. THE OFFICER INCHARGE, DISTRICT PRISON, VIRUDHUNAGAR.

4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SATTUR TALUK POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

5. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1CC TO Mr.M.S.JEYAKARTHIK, ADVOCATE, SR NO.6476

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9859 of 2020 Date :16/09/2020 MS/VR/SAR-4/18.09.2020/3P.7C 3/3