BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Fifteenth day of September Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT THE HON`BLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.12245 of 2011 MUTHUKUMAR ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 Vs THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE BRIDGE POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI. CRIME NO.680 OF 2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT FOR PETITIONER : MR.M.VEILKANI RAJU SENIOR COUNSEL FOR M/S.M.SUNDAR ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT : MR.A.RAMAR GOVT. ADVOCATE ( CRL. SIDE) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL UNDER SEC.438 CR.P.C. ORDER : THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER :- The petitioner/accused No.1 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 51, 52(A), 63, 68(A) of Copy Right Act in Crime No.680 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent has made raid on 25.7.2011 and he arrested A2 and A2 is the salesman and the respondent seized 140 new film CD's and that have been recovered before the court of law and A2/salesman was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on the same day for selling CDs without copy right and A1 is the owner of the shop and he is nothing to do with the commission of offence and he is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he apprehend for arrest and and hence, he prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that A1 is the owner of the shop and A2 is the salesman and on the fateful day of ride, 140 new film CD's have been seized and A2 was arrested and released on bail and A1 is having one previous case and if he enlarged on anticipatory bail, he will commit the same offence and hence, he prays for dismissal of this application. 4.Considering the rival submissions made by both sides,admittedly A1 is the owner of the shop,where A2 is the salesman,and raid has been conducted on 25.7.2011 140 new film CD's have been seized and A2 was arrested and subsequently,he was enlarged on bail and the petitioner is having one more previous case in the same nature and it is the fit case for imposing condition to deposit Rs.20,000/-.Hence,I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on condition that the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/- to the credit of Crime No.680 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Tirunelveli, and on receipt of the same, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Magistrate concerned and 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. 5.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/- 15/09/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.IV, TIRUNELVELI. 2 DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BRIDGE POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC TO M/S.M.VEILKANIRAJU, ADVOCATE SR.NO.12245. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12245 of 2011 Date :15/09/2011 2P/6C RPB 20.09.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/