K. Valarmathy v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Thirtieth day of October Two Thousand and Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD) No.14075 of 2018 1.K. VALARMATHY 2.K. ANUPRIYANKA 3.S.K. JOTHIPRIYA 4.M. PRABHU ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED 1 to 4 Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARIYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, TRICHY CITY.
(CRIME NO. 368 OF 2018) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioners : Mr.B.JAMEEL ARASU, Advocate. For Respondent : Mrs.M.ANANTHA DEVI, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervener : Mr.B.JANARTH KUMAR @ B.JANATHA AHMED, Advocate. PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 379, 344, 448, 452, 506(i) and 34 I.P.C in Crime No.368 of 2018, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner is the own aunt of the defacto complainant. Due to partition dispute between the family members, there are four civil suits pending before the competent Civil Court. In one suit regarding electricity service connection was dismissed in favour of the defacto complainant and thereafter, the petitioners and others are said to have trespassed into the property in question and damaged the E.B. Board, meter and wires, worth about Rs.10,000/-. and also assaulted the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint. 3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the intervener.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the the petitioners are trespassed into the property of the defacto complainant house and damaged the defacto complainant's property, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
worth about Rs.10,000/- and they are habitual offenders. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and the investigation is pending.
5.Taking note of the facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. The petitioners are directed to jointly deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) to the credit of Crime No.368 of 2018 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Trichy. On such deposit, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Trichy and on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.
m for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the conditions stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. 6.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 shall stand dismissed.
sd/- 30/10/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.VI, TRICHY.
2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY. 3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARIYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, TRICHY CITY.
4.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to Mr.B.JAMEEL ARASU, Advocate SR.No.20884. +1. CC to Mr.JANATH AHMED, Advocate SR.No.20826.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.14075 of 2018 Date :30/10/2018 RAM/JC/SAR 4/09.11.2018/2P/7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/