1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Nineteenth day of September Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT THE HON`BLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.12291 of 2011 L.ANBUSELVAM @ ANBU ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PALANOOR POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT. ( CRIME NO.67 OF 2011 ) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. VEERA KATHIRAVAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.RAMAR, 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 Section 406 I.P.C., in Crime No.67 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that one Vasuki, who is the mother of Senthilkumar, who is working as Sub Inspector of Police, is running a finance company and chit business and since the petitioner has not paid the amount, difference of opinion arose and hence, she has given a complaint against the petitioner as if, the petitioner has pledged the jewel of the said Vasuki and he has not returned the same. He further submitted that on the basis of the said complaint, the petitioner and his family members were called for enquiry to the police Station and therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.No.10345 of 2011, in that application the prosecution has stated that petition enquiry was conducted and the same has been closed and on the basis only, that application was disposed of with a direction to the respondent not to harass the petitioners under the guise of petition enquiry and follow the dictum laid down in D.K.Basu Vs. State of West Bengal reported in AIR (1997) SC 610. At last now the present case has been registered only on the basis of the complainant given by one Rajendran, who is the friend of the Sub Inspector of Police, who is the son of Vasuki, in that complaint, his vehicle was sold through the petitioner. He further submitted that the alleged occurrence has taken place in the year 2008, however, the complaint has been given in the year 2009 and hence, he prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. Refuting the same, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that a case has been registered under Section 406 I.P.C. against Kalyana Sundram, Muthu Ramalingam, Srinivasan and Saravanan. He further submitted that the petitioner was not arrayed as an accused in this case. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and also considering the fact that the petitioner was not arrayed as an accused, but there is reference about the petitioner and the occurrence has been taken place in the year 2008 and even though the petitioner was not arrested neither he interfered with the investigation nor absconded from the jurisdiction, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions. 5. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before the (*)learned Additional District Munsif cum learned Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai and on executing 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dindigul daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously. 6. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. sd/- 19/09/2011 (*)Amended as per order dated 10.11.2011 in MP(MD)No.3/11 in Crl.OP.No.12291/11 by SNJ / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO: To be substituted order already despatched. (*)1. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MANAMADURAI. 2. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGANGAI. 3.-DO- THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGANGAI. 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALANOOR POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT. 5. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. VEERA KATHIRAVAN Advocate SR.No.39153 SR : 20.09.2011 : 2p/6c RP/11.11.2011/2P/7C. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12291 of 2011 Date :19/09/2011. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/