BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Second day of March Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice C.T.SELVAM CRL OP(MD) No.2734 of 2011 1 N. RAJKUMAR 2 JEYARAJAN 3 JADA 4 MANONMANI 5 GNANADURAI ISSAC SAMUVEL 6 AARDHARRAJA 7 JOSEPH JEYASINGH 8 MERSY 9 KALAVATHI ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 1 TO 9 Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, PALAYAMKOTTAI, TIRUNELVELI CITY, CR NO. 4/2011 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. M.SARAVANAKUMAR Advocate For Intervenor : MR.VEERAKATHIRAVAN, ADVOCATE For Respondent : MR.P.RAJENDRAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 471A, 120-B I.P.C., in Crime No.4 of 2011, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2. This Court heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent State. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners have nothing to do with the alleged offence as stated in the complaint. 4.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners along with some other accused have mishandled the diocese cash account and there by diverted Rs.34.4 lakh rupees and spent the same for their personal gains https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and further in the complaint it is alleged that the said misappropriation has damaged the cash flow system of the diocese. Further in their complaint the defacto complainant alleged that the said amount has been diverted from the educational institution accounts towards the legal fees spent on election dispute. 5.The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor would strenuously oppose the grant of Anticipatory Bail. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the offence alleged, thisCourt is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned 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 Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli, and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required. sd/- 02/03/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,TIRUNELVELI 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, PALAYAMKOTTAI, TIRUNELVELI CITY, 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S. M.SARAVANAKUMAR Advocate SR.No.11374 +1 CC TO MR. VEERA KATHIRAVAN, ADVOCATE S.R NO. 11082 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.2734 of 2011 Date :02/03/2011 PAM 04.03.2011/7C/2P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/