← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/13286/2021dismissed

Magudeeswaran v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

2021-09-24Honourable Mr Justice B.Pugalendhi3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 24/09/2021 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI CRL OP(MD). No.13286 of 2021

1. Magudeeswaran

2. Ramaraj ... Petitioners/Accused No. 1 & 2 Vs The State rep. by, The Sub-Inspector of Police, Keeranur Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.333/2021) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : M/s.R.Manoharan, Advocate.

For Respondent : M/s.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.333 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/accused No. 1 & 2, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 447, 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.333 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 03.09.2021 due to previous motive, the accused trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant, wherein, some wordy altercation took place between them. Thereafter, the accused attacked the defacto

complainant by using stick and hands. Therefore, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police and the same was registered in Cr.No.333 of 2021 for the alleged offences under Sections 447, 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) of IPC.

3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submit that the defacto complainant and her relatives thrown the stone at the house of the first accused and he questioned the same. In order to escape from the clutches of law, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police. The first accused and the defacto complainant are neighbours and relatives. The second petitioner is the friend of the first accused, he was implicated in this case.

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the investigation is at initial stage. The allegation as against the petitioners is that they have entered into the house of the defacto complainant and also abused them by using filthy language. The husband of Kaleeswari, who is the sister of the defacto complainant, died. She and her daughter are living without the support of male members. Taking advantage of that, the petitioners entered into the house of the defacto complainant and abused them. Investigation is at crucial stage.

5. In view of the allegations made against the petitioners and considering that the investigation is at crucial stage, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Hence, this petition is dismissed.

sd/- 24/09/2021 / TRUE COPY / / /2021 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.III) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

AM/CSM 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 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KEERANUR POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.13286 of 2021 Date :24/09/2021 SP/JM/SAR III/29/09/2021/3P/3C