Veerapandi v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 05/10/2020 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

1. Veerapandi

2. Muthumari

3. Nagavalli @ Nagavali

4. Thangamuthu Chandran @ Thangamuthu Muneeswaran

5. Veeramani

6. Rajakumari

7. Pasumala Devi @ Pasumaladevi

8. Soorammal Panjadi @ Soorammal

9. Solaiyappan Karupnan @ Solaiyappan

10. Selvamani

11. Kalieswari @ Kaleeswari

12. Sudalai Muniyaiya @ Sudalai

13. Muthammal

14. Duraisamy Arakkasu @ Duraisamy

15. Senthil Shanmugam

16. Sethupathy @ Sedhupathi

17. Palpandi Kalimuthu @ Palpandi

18. Parvathi @ Umayaparavathi

19. Muthu Marieswaran Palpandi @ Muthu Marishwaran

20. Peratheep Kumar Ravichandran @ Pradeepkumar

21. Saravanan Murugesan @ Saravanakumar

22. Palapandi Mookkaiah @ Palpandi

23. Pal Duraisamy @ Balamurugan

24. Veerapandi Panjandi @ Veerapandi

25. Velusamy Sempattaiyan @ Velusamy

26. Kottaisamy Mookupodi @ Kottaisamy

27. Ganeswari @ Kanneshewari

28. Chinnathambi

29. Valli Chinna Thambi @ Valli

30. Panjawaranam @ Panjavarnam

31. Sooramuthu Muniyaiya@ Suramuthu

32. Kaliyammal

33. Sunthara Raj Muniyandi @ Sundaraj

34. Pandiyammal ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 29 to 37 Vs The State rep.by The Inspector of Police, Sayalkudi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

Crime No.373 of 2020.

... Respondent/Complainant 1/4

For Petitioners: Mr.K.Sivabalan, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.R.Erottuchamy, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.373 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent Police ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1 to 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 29 to 37, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 448, 436, 379 and 506(i) of IPC and Section 3 of Tamilnadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992, in Crime No.373 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that there is a dispute with regard to missing of one girl viz., Mookambigai D/O.Muniyasamy, due to which, the petitioners said to have trespassed into the defacto complainant's house and damaged house hold articles worth about Rs.70,000/- and also stolen 15 sovereigns of gold. Based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the crime has been registered against the petitioner.

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's son eloped with the petitioner's relative daughter and got married. Due to which, the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. All the allegations are concerned, they are nothing to do with the alleged occurrence. He further submitted that the petitioner's relative daughter and son of the defacto complainant are living together. 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 due to dispute with regard to missing of one girl viz., Mookambigai D/O.Muniyasamy, the petitioners trespassed into the defacto complainant's house and damaged the house hold articles worth about Rs.70,000/- and also stolen 12 sovereigns of gold and set fire to the poultry form. 2/4

6.On perusal of the records, it is seen that one of the petitioners' relative daughter eloped with the defacto complainant's son and got married, due to which, the petitioners entered into the house of the defacto complainant and damaged house hold articles worth about Rs.70,000/- and stolen 12 sovereigns of gold and set fire to the poultry form.

7.Considering the above circumstances and also considering the fact that the petitioners are relative of the missing girl and there is no serious allegations against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 8.Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to the credit of Crime No.373 of 2020, before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Kadaladi, Ramanathapuram District. On such deposit, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or their appearance, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Kadaladi, Ramanathapuram District, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.

(b)the petitioners 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 31 and 33 shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation. Further, the petitioners 2, 6, 7, 10, 11, 13, 18, 27, 29, 30, 32 and 34 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;

(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;

3/4

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

sd/- 05/10/2020 / 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, KADALADI, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

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

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

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

+1. CC to M/S.K.SIVABALAN Advocate SR.No.6811

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10751 of 2020 Date :05/10/2020 VSG TK/AKM/SAR.2/12.10.2020/4P/6C 4/4