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.12669 of 2011 ANITHA RADHAKRISHNAN ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 9 Vs STATE REP BY:: THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KULASEKARAPATTINAM POLICE STATION, TUTICORIN DISTRICT, CRIME NO.283/2009 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. S.RAVI 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.9 apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147,148,324 and 307 IPC and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act in Crime No.283 of 2009 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 A9 in Crime No.283 of 2009 under Sections 147,148,324 and 307 IPC and under Section 3 of TNPPDL Act, stating that the alleged occurrence took place on 15.12.2009, during the Tiruchedur assembly bye-election, the de-facto complainant campaigned for the AIADMK candidate and at that time this petitioner also contesting the bye-election in opposite party but the was not present at the time of occurrence. Even though the case has been registered on 15.12.2009 he was never interfered with the investigation nor absconding from the jurisdiction. He further submits that the petitioner was falsely implicated and only because of political vendetta the case has been registered and the injured has been discharged from the hospital and hence he prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 3.Refuting the same, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that on 15.12.2009 at the instruction of the petitioner the alleged occurrence took place and caused damage to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- to the eight cars and the investigation is going on. He fairly conceded that the injured has already been discharged from the hospital and the investigation is going on and hence he prays for dismissal of this application. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.Considering the rival submissions made on both side, it is seen that the alleged occurrence is said to have been taken place on 15.12.2011; the case has been registered against eight named accused and this petitioner shows as A9 and his name has not find place in FIR, even though the case has been registered 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 District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchendur, 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 District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchendur, 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 DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUCHENDUR, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT 2 DO THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THOOTHUKUDI 3 THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT MADURAI 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KULASEKARAPATTINAM POLICE STATION, TUTICORIN DISTRICT 1. CC to M/S. S.RAVI Advocate SR.No.32778: DM::2011:SEPTEMBER:26:: ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12669 of 2011 Date :22/09/2011 2P:6C:; https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/