R.Vijayakumar v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Nineteenth day of January Two Thousand and Twenty Four PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI 1 R.VIJAYAKUMAR 2 SAKTHIVEL 3 MUTHU 4 MALLAIYAN 5 SELLAPANDIYAN ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL.

IN CRIME NO.NOT KNOWN /2023 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT SIVAJI ... PETITIONER/THIRD PARTY/ VICTIM & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT in CRL MP(MD)No.294 of 2024 in CRL OP(MD)No.23311 of 2023 For Petitioner : Mr.B.AZHAGESH Advocate For Respondent : MR.P.KOTTAICHAMY, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : M/s.P.KRISHNAVENI, Advocate 1/3

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. PRAYER:

FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRIME NO.NOT KNOWN /2023 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 alleged offence under Sections 120-B, 406 and 420 of IPC, in Crime No.Not Known of 2023 seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are employees of the defacto complainant tea shop and the said business was monitored by the de-facto complainant through CCTV. Subsequently, he came to know that everyday the petitioners and other employees took the money from the cash box and after identification, the defacto complainant made a complaint before the respondent police. Hence, the case.

3.Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners seek permission of this Court to withdraw this petition. 4.The learned counsel for the intervenor vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the State would submit that as per the CCTV footage, the petitioners and other employees took the 2/3

money from the cash box and hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6.Considering the nature of the offence and that, as per the CCTV footage, the accused persons took the money from the cash box, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7.In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 19/01/2024 / TRUE COPY / /01/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

SJI TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL.

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

ORDER

IN Date :19/01/2024 SS/JGB/SAR- /31/01/2024/3P/3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 3/3