1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Seventh day of September Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.11444 of 2011 A. PANDI ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.1 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SIVANTHIPATTI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT, CRIME NO.92/2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. G.ANBU SARAVANAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.RAMAR,Addl.Public Prosecutor( Crl. Side) 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 punishable under Sections 294(b), 448, 427, 506 (ii) and 379 I.P.C. and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act in Crime No.92 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is arrayed as A1 and a false case has been foisted against the petitioner under Sections 294(b), 448, 427, 506(ii) and 379 I.P.C. and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act He further submitted that the alleged occurrence has been taken place on 07.07.2011 at 15.00 hrs and the complaint has been given on 08.07.2011. He further submitted that the the petitioner's minor daughter was kidnapped by the defacto complainant's son and hence, the petitioner has given a complaint against him and a case has been registered in Crime No.82 of 2011 for girl missing on 07.07.2011. As a counter blast, the present complaint has been given stating that the petitioner has caused damage to the property worth about Rs.1,14,000/-. He further submitted that the petitioner is an innocent persons and he has been falsely implicated in this case and hence, he prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner has caused damage to the property worth about Rs.1,14,000/- and also stolen the gold jewels. He further submitted that the investigation is going on and hence, he prays for the dismissal of this application. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. Considering the rival submissions made by both sides and also considering the fact that this is a case and case in counter and since the petitioner's minor daughter was kidnapped by the defacto complainant's son, a case has been registered against him on 07.07.2011, then only, the present complaint has been given on 08.07.2011 by the defacto complainant as if, the occurrence has been taken place on 07.07.2011 and the co- accused has already been released on bail, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions. 5. 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.III, 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the Court concerned daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. 6. 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/- 07/09/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.III,TIRUNELVELI. 2 DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,TIRUNELVELI. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,SIVANTHIPATTI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. 4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC to M/S. G.ANBU SARAVANAN Advocate SR.No.30396 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.11444 of 2011 Date :07/09/2011 PA/12.09.2011/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/