Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/20797/2023granted

Ponselvam v. The Inspector Of Police

2023-11-20Honourable Mr Justice V.Sivagnanam5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20/11/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V. SIVAGNANAM

1. Ponselvam

2. Abinaya @ Rasathi

3. Kousalya

4. Nivenitha @ Vani

5. Rajendran ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 5 Vs State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Emaneeswaram Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

Crime No.182/2023 ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners :

Mr.T.Eashwar, 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.182/2023 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/5

The petitioners/A1 to A5, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 294(b), 427 and 506(ii) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act, 2002 in Crime No.182 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on 05.11.2023 at about 7.00 a.m, when the defacto complainant and her mother were selling fish at Vaigai Nagar bus stop, Paramakudi, the petitioners along with other accused abused her and not allowed to sell fish and made a serious life threat. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are the innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution.

Hence, he prays for anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioners have thrown the fished worth about Rs.10,000/-. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on the record. 6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and 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.

Joginder Kumar vs. State of U.P. and others reported in (1994)4 SCC 260 and taking into consideration the origin of crime, it is seen that the alleged offence against the petitioners is not a case of heinous crime. Further, the petitioners are having permanent resident at Sivagangai District. Hence, the principles stated in Hussainara Khatoon & Ors vs. Home Secretary, State Of Bihar reported in AIR 1979 SC 1360 are 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 has his roots in the community and is not likely to abscond, he can safely be released on his personal bond.

7.In view of the above, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi on condition that the petitioners shall execute a 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 petitioners 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 petitioners shall report before the trial Court on summons. [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]. [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

sd/- 20/11/2023 / TRUE COPY / /12/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

skn 4/5

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PARAMAKUDI.

2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

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

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

+1 CC to M/s.T.EASHWAR, Advocate ( SR-16549[I] dated 20/11/2023 )

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.20797 of 2023 Date :20/11/2023 RS/SKN/SAR-(04.12.2023) 5P 6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5