Rajeswaran v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 11/10/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V. SIVAGNANAM Rajeswaran ... Petitioner/Accused Vs The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar West Police Station, Virudhunagar District, (In Crime No.207 of 2023).

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Subash Babu, Senior Counsel for M/s.Karthick P, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.Rms.Sethuraman, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 207 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/accused, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 153, 153A and 505(2) IPC in Crime 1/5

No.207 of 2023, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner herein making defamatory and derogatory statements against the Chief Minister and Minister for youth welfare and Sports Development. Hence, the case.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and his name has been falsely implicated in this case. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that during the time of Vinayagar Chathurthi festival petitioner herein making defamatory and derogatory statements against the Chief Minister and Minister for youth welfare and Sports Development and hence, he strongly opposed to grant to anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court perused the FIR and also the the relevant speech played before this Court.

6.Taking into consideration the principles stated by the Honourable Supreme Court in Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia Etc., vs. State of Punjab reported in 1980 AIR 1632 and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in (2009)4 SCC 437 and Joginder Kumar vs. State of U.P. and others reported in (1994)4 SCC 260, this Court is of the considered view that the alleged 2/5

offence against the petitioner are not a case of heinous crime. Further, the petitioner is having permanent resident at Kanniyakumari District and the origin of the crime is defamatory words against the Chief Minister and Sports Minister of Tamil Nadu. In this circumstances, the principles stated in Hussainara Khatoon & Ors vs. Home Secretary, State Of Bihar reported in AIR 1979 SC 1360 is taken into consideration. In that case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has cautioned that pre-trial detention is not be encouraged nor is to be encourageable pre-trial release on sureties; that if the Court is satisfied after taking into consideration that the accused have their roots in the community and is not likely to abscond, they can safely be released on his own bond.

7. In view of the above, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Virudhunagar District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute own bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that :

3/5

[a] The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on receiving summons as directed by the trial Court.

[b] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [d] 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]. [e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

sd/- 11/10/2023 / TRUE COPY / /10/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TRP TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

4/5

2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VIRUDHUNAGAR WEST POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1 CC to M/s.P.KARTHICK, Advocate ( SR-15007[I] dated 11/10/2023 )

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.17868 of 2023 Date :11/10/2023 SS/DD/SAR- /20/10/2023/5P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5