BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the First day of December Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr. Justice V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.15676 of 2011 1 THAMILARASI, W/O.AYYAVOO @ MAYILVAHANAN 2 THAMILARASI, W/O.SOLAMALAI 3 SAMAYAN ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED NOS.10,14&15 Vs THE STATEA OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY ITS INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SAMAYANALLUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT. (CR.NO.328 OF 2009) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. J.JAWAHAR Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.S.DURAIPANDIAN, Addl. Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 365, 357, 344, 352, 313, 323, 506(ii) and 380 of I.P.C in Crime Number 328 of 2009 on the file of the respondent police, the petitioners/accused Nos.10, 14 and 15 have approached this Court for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3.According to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the alleged occurrence is said to have taken place on 01.12.2008 and the case was registered in the year 2009 under Sections 147, 365, 357, 344, 352, 313, 323, 506(ii) and 380 of I.P.C and the petitioners were shown as accused Nos.10, 14 and 15 and they were not aware of the said implication. He would further submit that the co- accused have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court and investigation is still pending and the petitioners are apprehending arrest in the hands of the 2nd respondent police. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit in his argument that the said case is still under the investigation. If for any reason this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners suitable conditions may be imposed. 5.Considering the submissions made by both sides and also considering that the co-accused were already released on anticipatory bail by this Court, I could see that the petitioners are entitled to the similar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ order. So, on the face of the petition, I could see that the third petitioner is aged only 18 years as on today. The alleged occurrence took place on 01.12.2008 and therefore he ought to have been a juvenile on that day. Hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with the following conditions. i)Accordingly, the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the concerned Judicial Magistrate and on each executing a bond with two sureties for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti, Madurai; ii)the petitioners 1 & 2/accused Nos.10 and 14 shall report before the respondent police as and when required; and iii)the petitioners 1 & 2/accused Nos.10 and 14 shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days, failing which, the anticipatory bail granted shall stand automatically cancelled. iv)the petitioner No.3/accused No.15 shall appear before the Juvenile Justice Board, Madurai within a period of 15 days, failing which, the anticipatory bail granted shall stand automatically cancelled. sd/- 01/12/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VADIPATTI, MADURAI. 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE MADURAI. 3. THE OFFICER IN-CHARGE, THE JUVENILE JUSTICE BOARD, MADURAI. 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SAMAYANALLUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT. 5. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. J.JAWAHAR Advocate SR. No.42289 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.15676 of 2011 Date :01/12/2011 RJ/7.12.11 2p/6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/