BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Second day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.15102 of 2011 MUNIYASAMY ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED 2 Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE COMMERCIAL CRIME INVESTIGATION WING (CCIW), VIRUDHUNAGAR, CRIME NO.3/2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. A.K.MANICKAM Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.S.DURAIPANDIAN, Additional Public Prosecutor 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 offences under Sections 408, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477 (A) and 120(B) IPC in Crime NO.3 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. Heard Mr.A.K.Manickam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.s.Durai Pandian learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent state. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the petitioner is ranked as A2 and he is only a Computer Operator Working in the Virduhunagar District Central Co-Operative Bank, Srivilliputhur and the Co-accused A1 and A3 are the erstwhile Manager and the present Manager of the said Bank, and the offence said to have committed by the petitioner was that he also conspired together with the other accused and misappropriated a sum of Rs.1,20,000/-. He also submitted that the said money was paid to the Bank and there is no outstanding and the co accused have also been granted with anticipatory bail. He would further submit that the petitioner is also on the same footing and he may also be granted anticipatory bail. 4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit in his argument that the said misappropriate amount was paid and if for any reason this Court has come to the conclusion of granting anticipatory bail stringent conditions may be imposed. 5. Considering the submission made by both sides, I could see that A1 and A3 who are the erstwhile and present Managers of the Co-Operative Bank, were granted anticipatory bail and they are complying with the conditions. In the said circumstances the petitioner, who is the second accused, is the Computer Operator working in the said Bank, is also on the some footing and therefore, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 6. Accordingly the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Magistrate NO.II, Virudhunagar 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 respondent police daily at 10.30 am., until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C scrupulously. 7. 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/- 22/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, VIRUDHUNAGAR 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VIRUDHUNAGAR AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE COMMERCIAL CRIME INVESTIGATION WING (CCIW), VIRUDHUNAGAR, 4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. A.K.MANICKAM Advocate SR.No.40939 GH : 23.11.2011 : 2P/6C ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.15102 of 2011 Date :22/11/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/