BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Fifteenth day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.14812 of 2011 SARAVANAN ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.6 Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THURAIYUR POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.436 OF 2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. B.JAMEELARASU Advocate For Respondent : Mr.C.RAMESH Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The Petitioner is arrayed as A6 and he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 417, 294(b), 376 and 506 (i) I.P.C. in Crime No.436 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.Heard Mr.B.Jameelarasu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.C.Ramesh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Criminal Side) appearing for the State. 3.THe learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit in his argumnet that the petitioner is ranked as A6 and that a part role played by the petitioner as per the story mentioned in the F.I.R. was that he along with other persons viz, Kuppandi @ Satishkumar, Loganathan had taken a stick and had shown at the de-facto complainant that they would murder him if he is pursuing the said problem. He would further submit in his argument that apart from that any other offence has not been stated against the petitioners, in the said circumstances, he would request the Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit in his argument that the main offence of rape was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ committed by the first accused with the help of other accused. He would further submit in his argument that the petitioner is ranked as A6 and the allegation against them is only in respect of the offences under Sections 294(b) and 506(ii) I.P.C., therefore, stringent condition may be issued in the event of grant of anticipatory bail. 5.Considering the submission made by both sides, I could see that the offences said to have been committed by the petitioner are only under Sections 294(b) and 506(ii) I.P.C. and if it is made out during the investigation and under the said circumstances, the petitioner released on anticipatory bail will not in any hurdle to the investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thuraiyur, Trichy District 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, Thuraiyur, Trichy District and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogatin. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously. 6.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/- 15/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THURAIYUR, TRICHY DISTRICT 2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY DISTRICT 3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THURAIYUR POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT. +1. CC to M/S. B.JAMEELARASU Advocate SR.No.39747 rl/6c – 16.11.2011 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14812 of 2011 Date :15/11/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/