Gokul v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 21/11/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V. SIVAGNANAM

1. Gokul,

2. Muvendran,

3. Sathiyamoorthi,

4. Sakthivel,

5. Thiyagarajan,

6. Natarajan,

7. Kannaki ... Petitioners / Accused No.1 to 7 Vs State rep by The Inspector of Police, Musiri Police Station, Musiri, Trichy District.

(Crime No.453/2023.) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners :

Mr.K.Arunraj, Advocate.

For Respondent :

Mr.R.M.S.Sethuraman, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.453/2023 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A1 to A7, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 147,294(b),(*)323,324 and 506(ii) 1/5

IPC r/w.Section 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.453 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that due to wordy quarrel the petitioners herein abused the defacto complainant, assaulted the defacto complainant and also criminally intimidated, hence the case.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and a false case has been foisted against them, hence he seek anticipatory bail.

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioners herein abused the defacto complainant, assaulted the defacto complainant and also criminally intimidated hence he objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5.It is reported that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and it is a case and case in counter and no previous case is pending against the petitioners. 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 and taking into consideration the origine of crime, it is seen that the 2/5

offence alleged as against the petitioners is not a case of heinous crime. Further the petitioners are having permanent residents at Trichy District. Hence 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 has his roots in the community and is not likely to abscond, they can safely be released on their personal bond. 6.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, Musiri on condition that the petitioners shall execute own bonds for a sum of Rs.

[a] the petitioners shall affix his photograph and Left Thumb Impression in the bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book 3/5

to ensure their identity.

[b] the petitioners shall report before the trial Court on receipt of 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/- 21/11/2023 (*)Amended as per order of the Court dt.11.12.2023 in Crl.MP(MD).17347/2023 in Crl.OP(MD).20844/2023.

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

4/5

AAV To TO BE SUBSTITUTED WITH THE ORDER DATED 21/11/2023 ALREADY DESPATCHED 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Musiri.

2.Do through the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trichy District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Musiri Police Station, Musiri, Trichy District.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1CC to M/s.K.ARUNRAJ, Advocate, SR.No.17566(I), dated 11.12.2023

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.20844 of 2023 Date :21/11/2023 ED/DD/SAR- (27/11/2023) 5P / 6 C DSS SA/JGB/SAR. /20.12.2023/5P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5