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.15689 of 2011 1. KUMAR, 2. RAJA, 3. THENNARASU ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED A1, 2 & 5 Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AYYAMPETTAI POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DT. (CR.NO.260/2011) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. G.KARNAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.S.DURAIPANDIAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners are arrayed as accused and the first petitioner was arrested on 20.11.2011 and the second and third petitioners were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.11.2011 for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 147, 148, 342, 323, 324 and 307 IPC in Crime NO.260 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence seek bail. 2. Heard Mr.G.Karnan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.K.S.Duraipandian learned Additional Public Prosecutor (criminal Side) appearing for the state. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit in his argument that the petitioners are ranked as A1, A2 and A5 and they are in judicial custody for more than 15 days and the injured person have been discharged from the hospital. He would further submit in his argument that the petitioners have filed the bail petition before the learned Sessions Judge and the same was dismissed on the ground that the petitioners have carried dangerous weapons in their hand and the offence was committed by them. He would further submit that the accused persons in counter case have not been arrested so far and hence, he prays for bail. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit in his argument that the petitioners have involved in the case in counter case and there is no instruction that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital and the investigation is pending and the plea of the petitioners for grant of bail may not be considered. 5. Considering the submission made on both sides, I could see that the lower court dismissed the bail petition filed by the petitioners on the ground that they have carried dangerous weapons in their hand and grievous injuries have been made It has also been mentioned that the injured persons were discharged from the hospital. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case that the injured were discharged from the hospital and this case being the counter case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail on the following conditions. Accordingly the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on executing a separate 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 NO.III, Thanjavur and on further condition that the petitioners should stay at Trichy and should appear before the cantonment police station, daily at 10.30 am., until further orders. 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 NO.III THANJAVUR 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THANJAVUR 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AYYAMPETTAI POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DT. 5. THE OFFICER IN CHARGE, CANTONMENT POLICE STATION, TRICHY 6. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. G.KARNAN Advocate SR.No.42192 GH : 02.12.2011 : 2P/8C ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.15689 of 2011 Date :01/12/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/