Amsamani v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06.01.2025 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice N.ANAND VENKATESH in CRL OP(MD)No.17344 of 2024 Amsamani ... Petitioner/Intervenor/ Defacto- Complainant Vs

1. State rep by The Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai Police Station, Madurari.

Crime No.392 of 2024 ... 1st Respondent /1st Respondent Complainant

2. Raja @ Raja Pandi ... Respondent No.2/ Petitioner / Sole Accused For Petitioner : Mr.J.Mohamed Ibrahim Advocate.

For R1 : Mr.Thanga Aravindh Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) For R2` : Mr.Dhana Aravinda Balaji V.A Advocate 1/4

PRAYER : Petition filed under Section 483(2) of BNSS praying to set aside and cancel the order against the Respondent No.2/ Accused granted by this Court in Crl.O.P. (MD).No.17344 of 2024 dated 17.10.2024.

ORDER

This petition has been filed to cancel the anticipatory bail granted in favour of the 2nd respondent/accused.

2. When the matter came up for hearing on 18.12.2024, this Court passed the following order:

Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) takes notice for the first respondent.

2. Mr.Dhana Aravinda Balaji,learned counsel takes notice for the second respondent.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) shall take instructions as to whether the second respondent had complied with the conditions imposed by this Court while he was granted anticipatory bail. Based on the same, further orders will be passed.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) on instructions submitted that 2nd respondent/accused executed sureties and also complied with the conditions imposed in para 6(b) and the accused reported before the Cantonment Police from 06.11.2024 to 09.12.2024.

4. In view of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. 2/4

Side), the first ground that was raised by the petitioner is not sustainable. . The second ground is that the 2nd respondent/accused did not mention the relevant provisions in the anticipatory bail petition.

5. In the considered view of this case, this Court had taken into consideration the entire facts of the case and also heard the learned learned counsel who appeared for the intervenor and had granted anticiaptory bail and the mere non mentioning the provision will not result in cancellation of anticipatory bail.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. sd/- 06/01/2025 / TRUE COPY / / 01 /2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. I / II / III / IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

SMA TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.VI, MADURAI.

2 DO-THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NAGAMALAIPUDHUKOTTAI POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT.

3/4

4 THE INSPECTER OF POLICE CANTONMENT POLICE STATION, TRICHY.

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

+1 CC to M/s.J.MOHAMED IBRAHIM, Advocate ( SR-165[I] dated 07/01/2025 )

ORDER

IN CRL MP(MD) No.13953 of 2024 IN CRL OP(MD) No.17344 of 2024 Date :06/01/2025 PSP/ SKN /SAR /21.01.2025/ 4P/ 7C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4