1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Nineteenth day of December Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr. Justice V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.16573 of 2011 A.V. RAMASUBBU RAJA ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED (RANK NOT KNOWN) Vs STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CSCID, TIRUNELVELI, CRIME NO.500/2011 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. T.LENIN KUMAR 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 :- The petitioner/Accused apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Section 6(4) of TNSC (RDCS) Order, 1982 r/w 7(1) (a) (ii) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, in Crime Number 500 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the petitioner has been ranked as A-4 in this case, in which a complaint was given by the Inspector of Police and the same was registered by himself and he is also to investigate the case. He would further submit in his argument that such registration by the same complainant is forbidden by various judgments of this Court. In that aspect, the petitioner is having a prima facie case for getting anticipatory bail. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit in his argument that the petitioner was represented as A-4 on the confession given by A-1 stating that the PDS rice to the tune of 56 bags were found at A-3's house were being sold to A-4 for his purpose. He would also submit that the PDS rise meant for poor were taken away by this accused person and it is a serious matter and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for anticipatory bail. 5.Considering the submissions made by both sides, I could see that no doubt, smuggling of PDS rice from the benefit of poor persons is a https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 serious one. But however the complaint has been lodged by the same Station House Officer, who has registered the complaint. I could see that the registration of complaint is prima facie not sustained. Under the said circumstances, the petitioner has got a prima facie case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with the following conditions: i)Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.II, Tirunelveli 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 concerned and on further condition, ii)that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required. iii)The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. iv)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/- 19/12/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, TIRUNELVELI. 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUNELVELI. 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CSCID, TIRUNELVELI. 4. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. T.LENIN KUMAR Advocate SR. No.44365 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.16573 of 2011 Date :19/12/2011 RJ/20.12.11 2p/6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/