1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twelfth day of October Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr. Justice S.NAGAMUTHU CRL OP(MD) No.11643 of 2011 STANLEY AZARIA ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.2 Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT CR.NO.28/2011 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. T.A. EBENEZER 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, the petitioner, in Crime No.28 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Section 420k of the Indian Penal Code, has come forward with this petition seeking for anticipatory bail. 2. According to the case of the prosecution, there are totally three accused in this case. The first accused is a Company. The accused Nos.2 and 3 are partners of the said Company. It is alleged that during the year 2010, the accused Nos.2 and 3 gave a promise to the de-facto complainant to add him as one of the partners of the Company and on that promise, they received Rs.22 Lakhs. But they did not add him as a partner at all. When the de-facto complainant demanded the said amount, the third accused issued a cheque, which also bounced later on for insufficient funds. With these allegations, the present complaint has been registered. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is not true that the de-facto complainant was given any assurance to add him as a partner in the Company. There is only some civil dispute regarding money transaction. 4. I have considered the above submissions. 5. From the allegations made in the case records, it could be seen that there were money dealings between the parties, which has given rise to some dispute and therefore, I find prima facie case in favour of the petitioner for anticipatory bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Thoothukudi, 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 respondent Police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police every day at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C., scrupulously. sd/- 12/10/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, THOOTHUKUDI. 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THOOTHUKUDI. 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT 4. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. T.A. EBENEZER Advocate SR. No.35330 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.11643 of 2011 Date :12/10/2011 RJ/14.10.11 2p/6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/