BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Third day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr. Justice S.NAGAMUTHU CRL OP(MD) No.14293 of 2011 1 SELVAN, 2 NAGESWARAN 3 KARUNANITHI 4 PAULKANNAN 5 SUTHAKAR ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 1,2,4,5,7 Vs STATE REPRESENTED THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ODAIPATTI POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT. (CR.NO.122 OF 2011) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.P.SATHISHMURUGAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.S.DURAIPANDIAN, Addl. Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police, in Crime No.122 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police for offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 307 and 506(ii) IPC, the petitioners are before this Court seeking anticipatory bail. 2. According to the case of prosecution, due to election motive, these petitioners along with other accused assaulted the de-facto complainant with hands. The defacto complainant sustained simple injuries. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case, due to political motive. 4.I have considered the above submissions. 5.Going by the nature of the allegation made against the petitioners, the fact that no weapon has been used and no injury was caused and all other attending circumstances, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, but with stringent conditions. 6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail, in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Theni, 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned. 7.When it is expressed that the petitioners may undergo a condition to report before the respondent police for a period of four https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ weeks, the learned counsel for the petitioners himself submitted that it would be in the interest of the petitioners that they may be directed to stay at Dindigul and report before the Dindigul Town Police Station. In view of the said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are directed to remain at Dindigul and report before the Dindigul Town police Station, every day at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C scrupulously. sd/- 03/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THENI. 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THENI. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ODAIPATTI POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT. 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DINDIGUL TOWN POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL. 5. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S.HINDU ASSOCIATES Advocate SR. No.37842 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14293 of 2011 Date :03/11/2011 RJ/4.11.11 2p/7c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/