BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Third day of August Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT THE HON`BLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.9904 of 2011 1. GOPI 2. MATHAVAN 3. RAJAPUTHIRAN 4. KATTURAJA 5. KARUPPAIAH 6. ANDICHAMY 7. RAMARAJ 8. KANNAN 9. MATHURAIVEERAN 10. BALU @ BALUSAMY 11. KUNDUMALAI 12. CHINNASAMY 13. SANKAR 14. PANDI @ PAPANDI 15. KANNAN 16. PERIYAANAN 17. CHINNASAMY 18. SUNIL 19. THANGAVEL 20. RAJU 21. THANGAPANDI 22. PAULPANDI 23. MANI 24. BALU @ BALUCHAMY 25. PITCHAI 26. MURUGESAN 27. MOKKAI 28. SAKTHIVEL 29. MUTHAIAH 30. PONNUPANDI 31. THANGAPANDI 32. JEYAKUMAR ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE BATLAGUNDU POLICE STATION, IN CRIME NO.324/2011, DINDIGUL DISTRICT ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. M.SUBASH BAU Advocate For Respondent : A.RAMAR, ADDITINONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ( Crl. Side) 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 offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 448, 427, 341, 336, 324, 379 (N.P) and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.324 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ this case. He would further submit that the injured has already been discharged from the hospital and the investigation is considerably over and the co accused had already been released on bail and hence, he prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would fairly concede that the investigation is considerably over and the co-accused had already been enlarged on bail. 4. Considering the rival submissions made by both sides and also considering the fact that the co-accused had already been released on bail, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions. 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, Nilakottai and on executing a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall report before the court concerned daily at 10.30 am., until further orders. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C scrupulously. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that in the Magistrate Court, they are insisting for separate set of sureties for each and every accused. 7. Considering the number of accused, the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned is directed to verify whether one set of sureties is worthy enough to stand as a surety for all other accused, financially and character wise. 8. The petitioners 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/- 03/08/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,NILAKOTTAI 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,DINDIGUL 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE BATLAGUNDU POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT 4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S. M.SUBASH BAU Advocate SR.No.26048 GH : 05.08.2011 : 2p/6c ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.9904 of 2011 Date :03/08/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/