Puyal Pugalenthi @ Purushothaman, v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27/12/2024 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Puyal Pugalenthi @ Purushothaman ... Petitioner/Accused No.5 Vs.
The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Siruganur Police Station, Trichy District.
(Crime No. 180 of 2024).
... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr. J.M.Arvind Pawlraj For Respondent : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 180 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/ accused No.5, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the 1/5
respondent for the offences punishable under sections 147, 448, 427, 506(1) IPC in Crime No.180 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant purchased the property from the accused 1 and 2 and after purchase, the accused 1 and 2 tresspassed into the property and illegally evicted the tenants and illegally occupied the defacto complainant's property and rented out the 2nd and 3rd floors to MAM Engineering College students. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he was falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner is no way connected in this case.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that there is tenancy dispute between the parties and the accused illegally tresspassed into the property of the defacto complainant and the petitioner has no previous case. He strongly objected for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/5
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the rival submissions on either side, considering the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, considering the fact there is a tenancy dispute between the parties and the petitioner is having no previous case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Lalgudi, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on all Saturdays at 10.00 a.m for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.
[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. 3/5
[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
sd/- 27/12/2024 / TRUE COPY / /01/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
CM TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE LALGUDI.
2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY DISTRICT.
4/5
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SIRUGANUR POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.22907 of 2024 Date :27/12/2024 SS/SKN/SAR- /02/01/2025/ 5P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5