Muthupandi v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 23/09/2020 PRESENT The Hon'ble Mr.Justice V.BHARATHIDASAN 1.G.Muthupandi ... 1st Petitioner/1st Accused 2.Angammal ... 2nd Petitioner/2nd Accused 3.Shunmugaiah ... 3rd Petitioner/3rd Accused 4.Muthupandi ... 4th Petitioner/4th Accused 5.Mani @ Narayanan ... 5th Petitioner/5th Accused 6.Chellathurai ... 6th Petitioner/6th Accused 7.Sappani Muthu ... 7th Petitioner/7th Accused Vs State of Tamilnadu, Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Kayathar Police Station, Thoothukudi District. ... Respondent For Petitioners: Mr.U.Kasipandian, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C. PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.656 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1 to A7, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 147, 294(b), 323, 336, 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.656 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that due to civil dispute with regard to putting up asbestos sheets, there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, in which, the petitioners said to have abused the defacto complainant by using filthy language and also attacked her and caused injuries. Based on 1/3

the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the case has been registered against the petitioners.

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 petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that it is a case in counter. Earlier the petitioners have been attacked by the defacto complainant and hence, the petitioners have given a complaint against the defacto complainant and the same was registered in Crime No.654 of 2020. As a counter blast, the present complaint has been filed.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), appearing for the respondent police submitted that it is a case in counter. Due to civil dispute between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, the occurrence is said to have taken place. 6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that due to civil dispute, there was a wordy quarrel between petitioners and the defacto complainant and no serious injury is caused, this Court is 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 No.

II, Kovilpatti, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.

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

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

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

2/3

(e)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;

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

sd/- 23/09/2020 / 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, KOVILPATTI 2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT 3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KAYATHAR POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT 4.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.U.KASIPANDIAN Advocate SR.No.6566

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10152 of 2020 Date :23/09/2020 VSD PK/JC/SAR-1/28.09.2020 : 3P/6C 3/3