BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty First day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.15065 of 2011 MARICHAMY ... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VASUDEVANALLUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. IN CRIME NO.284/2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. S.KUMARESAN Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.S.DURAI PANDIAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 379, 353, 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.284 of 2011, on the file of the respondent police. He has approached this Court for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Heard Mr.S.Kumaresan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.S.Durai Pandian, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the allegation against the petitioner is that the Complainant and their partyman conducted a ride near Mariamman Temple and at that time, one Bullock cart crossing road having 1/2 unit sand without any proper permission and on seeing, the petitioner escaped from the scene of occurrence. He would further submit that petitioner is an innocent person and he did not committed any crime as stated in the complaint. He would submit that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would also submit that he is also having permanent residence and therefore, he would request for the grant of anticipatory bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit in his argument that the investigation is pending and if for any reason, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, suitable conditions may be passed for the secured presence of the petitioner. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to all the petitioner, of course, subject to certain stringent conditions. 6. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before the Judicial Magistrate concerned on executing 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 learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Sivagiri, Tirunelveli District and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for the purpose of interrogation. 7. The petitioner shall appear before the Magistrate concerned within a period of 15 days, failing which, the anticipatory bail granted shall stand automatically cancelled. sd/- 21/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE SIVAGIRI TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT 2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT 3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VASUDEVANALLUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. +1. CC to M/S. S.KUMARESAN Advocate SR.No.40855 rl/6c – 24.11.2011 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.15065 of 2011 Date :21/11/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/