Anvar Beig v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 09/10/2024 PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR 1.Anvar Beig 2.M.Rahamathullah 3.Jahangir 4.K.Ayaskhan 5.P.Mohamed Manzur 6.M.Sikkandar 7.S.Raja Mohammed 8.S.Poochandu 9.S.Abdul Hakkim 10.S.Asmath Husein 11.P.Mohamed Basudeen 12.P.Ajith Khan 1/7
13.S.Kaja Raja 14.P.Ajiesh 15.Mohamed Ibrahim @ Macha Raja 16.Mohamed Abdul Jafar @ Jafarullah 17.A.Yasin Mohammed 18.M.Rabeek Raja 19.Prozkhan 20.Jamal Moammed Iliyas 21.Imrankhan 22.Selvam 23.Sheik Mohammed Kasim 24.M.Amanulla ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 5, 7 to 18 and 20 to 26 Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Melavalavu Police Station, Melur Taluk, Madurai District.
(Crime No. 221 of 2024) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : Mr.P.Venkatesan Advocate.
2/7
For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.221 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/Accused, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 329(4), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS r/w Section 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Harassment of Womens Act, in connection with Crime No.221 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that there is a Jamath in the village of the defacto complainant and there is a dispute among the members of the Jamath and they divided into two groups. On 29.09.2024, the petitioners Nos.1 to 3 alleged to trespassed into the grocery shop of the defacto complainant and quarrelled with him. The third petitioner herein has attacked the defacto complainant's husband and caused injuries. Other petitioners have threatened her. Hence the complaint. 3/7
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there exists a dispute between two groups of jamath members. Initially, a case has also been registered in Crime No.220 of 2024 against the defacto complainant. As a counter blast, the defacto complainant has lodged a false case against the petitioners herein.
4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the respondent submits that there was a quarrel between two groups of jamath members. Five previous cases are pending against the 2nd petitioner / 2nd accused herein for the offences under the IPC, TNPHW Act and Section 8,9 and 12 of TNG Acts.
5. Considering the above submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.) side that the 2nd petitioner / Rahamathullah is having five previous cases, this Court is not inclined to grant relief to him. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed in so far as the second petitioner is concerned.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 4/7
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the petitioner Nos.1 and 3 to 24, are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai District, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that: (a)the petitioner Nos.
1 and 3 to 24, and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; (b)the petitioner Nos.1 and 3 to 13, 15, 16, 18 to 24, shall report before the respondent police daily at 06.00 pm for a period of one week. Since the petitioner Nos.14 and 17 are students, they shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. (c) the petitioner Nos.
(d)the petitioner Nos.1 and 3 to 24, shall not abscond either during 5/7
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 petitioner Nos.1 and 3 to 24, 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 thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.
sd/- 09/10/2024 / TRUE COPY / /10/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar (CS-I/II/III/IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
pnn TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MELUR, MADURAI DISTRICT, 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI.
6/7
3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MELAVALAVU POLICE STATION, MELUR TALUK, MADURAI DISTRICT.
4.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1 CC to M/s.C.R.RAVINDRA KUMAR, Advocate ( SR-12367[I] dated 10/10/2024 )
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.17367 of 2024 Date :09/10/2024 RK/JGB (16/10/2024) 7P / 6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 7/7