Pushpam, v. The Sub Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Nineteenth day of December Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP(MD) No.22348 of 2018 PUSHPAM, ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARUMANAI POLICE STATION, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.
(CRIME NO.84/2018) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MR.S.C.HEROLD SINGH Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI, Government Advocate(Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 174 @ 304(ii) of IPC in Crime No.84 of 2018, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is owning a piece of land for the purpose of putting up a compound. The petitioner's husband had called upon one Sam Daniel for excavating the earth around a rock. But the Sam Daniel had been enagaged by one Vijumon to carry out the work with the help of Hitachi excavator. While he was carrying out the work, the rock accidentally rolled over the Hitachi machine, in which, Vijumon was trapped inside the Hitachi machine and sustained grievous injury and succumbed. Hence, the complaint.
3. The Learned Government Advocate(Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 19.11.2018.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner being a senior citizen with medical ailment viz., arthritis, was unable to execute the surety in time. Since the
stipulated time granted by this Court expired, this petition has been filed.
5. Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either sides, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai on condition that the each of the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the said Magistrate, on further condition that:
[a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this order shall stand automatically cancelled.
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.
[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[d] the petitioner 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 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]. [f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.
sd/- 19/12/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, KUZHITHURAI.
2.DO THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.
3.THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARUMANAI POLICE STATION, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to MR.S.C.HEROLD SINGH Advocate SR.No.23599
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.22348 of 2018 Date :19/12/2018 AE/PN-AC/SAR3/31.12.2018/3P/6C