BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Second day of September Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.12640 of 2011 SATHESH ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED 4 Vs STATE REP BY:: THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVATTAR POLICE STATION, THIRUVATTAR, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT. ( CRIME NO.202 OF 2011 ) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. N.S.RAMAKRISHNA DASS Advocate For Respondent : MR. A. RAMAR, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused No.4 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b),447,379 and 506(ii)I.P.C. and r/w Section 3(1)(9) of T.N.P.P.D.L Act, 1992 in Crime No.202 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 A4 and the alleged occurrence took place on 10.04.2011 and the case has been registered under Sections 294(b), 447,379 and 506(ii)I.P.C. and r/w Section 3(1)(9) of T.N.P.P.D.L Act, 1992. He would further submit that the petitioner is a JCB Driver and A1 asked the petitioner for hire to JCB for his land earthwork and the petitioner has done the work on that day and he is nothing to do with the commission of offence and A1 to A3 were already arrested and enlarged on bail and hence, he prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 3.Refuting the same, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the occurrence took place on 10.04.2011 and the case has been registered against four persons A1 to A3 were arrested and enlarged on bail, this petitioner is A4 who is a driver of JCB and used the vehicle he caused a damage in the compound wall and destroyed thirteen rubber trees and a total damage worth about Rs.75,000/- and the investigation is going on and hence he prays for dismissal of this application. 4.Considering the rival submissions made on both side, it is seen that the alleged occurrence took place on 10.04.2011 the case has been registered against four persons under Sections 294(b),447,379 and 506 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (ii)I.P.C. and r/w Section 3(1)(9) of T.N.P.P.D.L Act, 1992. Already A1 to A3 were arrested and enlarged on bail, A4 is a driver of JCB, A1 is the owner of the property and hence the petitioner is acting only with the instruction of A1. Even though the petitioner was not arrested he neither interfered with the investigation nor absconded from the jurisdiction, 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, Padmanabhapuram and on his 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, Padmanabhapuram 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, anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed. sd/- 22/09/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PADMANABHAPURAM 2 DO THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KANYAKUMARI AT NAGERCOIL 3 THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT MADURAI 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVATTAR POLICE STATION, THIRUVATTAR, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT. 1. CC to M/S. N.S.RAMAKRISHNA DASS Advocate SR.No.32672: DM::2011:SEPTEMBER:27:: ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12640 of 2011 Date :22/09/2011 2P:6C:: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/