BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty First day of December Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice K.N.BASHA CRL OP(MD) No.16743 of 2011 1. A.SUBRAMANIAN 2. S.VINOTH KANNAN @ KANNAN 3. S.AATHISENTHIL : PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.3 to 5 Vs. THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, UNIT II, VISALAKSHIPURAM, OLD NATHAM ROAD, MADURAI – 14. (**)CRIME NO.98/2012 : RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. M.AJMAL KHAN for Mr.A.R.SENTHIL KUMAR Advocate For Respondent : Mr. T.MOHAN Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections (**)120(b), 477(A), 471, 408, 420 r/w 109 of IPC and seek anticipatory bail. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been arrayed as A3 to A5 and they have been implicated for the alleged offences under Sections (**)120(b), 477 (A), 471, 408, 420 r/w 109 of IPC , as a private complaint was preferred by the de-facto complainant before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai and the same was referred under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. to the respondent herein to register a case and investigate into the matter. It is contended that the main allegation levelled against A1, who is related to these petitioners, alleging that he has misappropriated the funds of the de-facto complainant, while he was working as a Manager and the petitioners have been implicated on the allegation of connivance with the main accused A1. It is submitted that earlier the petitioners have been treated as witness and subsequently, private complaint was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai in Cr.M.P.No.6208 of 2010 and in that complaint, the petitioners have been implicated as the accused. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. Per contra, Mr.T.Mohan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners have been examined only as witnesses. 4. It is seen that the petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences as stated above, on the basis of the complaint preferred by the de-facto complainant before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai in Cr.M.P.No.6208 of 2010 which was referred under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. to the respondent police. Considering the said submission and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant the relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with one surety for a like sum to the satisfaction of the said learned Judicial Magistrate or to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest and on further condition that the petitioners shall be available for interrogation as and when required. sd/- 21/12/2011 (**)CORRECTED ORDER ISSUED DT:21/12/2012 MADE IN MP.(MD)1.2012 IN CRL.OP(MD)NO.16743/2011 BY CTSJ / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO TO BE SUBSTITUTED FOR THE ORDER ALREADY DESPATCHED 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.1, MADURAI. 2. -DO- THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT. 3. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, UNIT II, VISALAKSHIPURAM, OLD NATHAM ROAD, MADURAI – 14. +1 CC to M/S. B.CHAKKARAVARHTI, Advocate SR.No.44089 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.16743 of 2011 Date :21/12/2011 NSV/22.12.11/2P/6C RL/6C – 4/1/2013 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/