1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Second day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.15155 of 2011 SENGAIMARAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1 Vs STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUPPUVANAM POLICE STATION, CRIME NO.343/2011, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. P.KUMARESAN 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 :- The petitioner / accused No.1, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 147, 148 I.P.C., and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act, in Crime No,343 of 2011, on the file of the respondent Police has filed this petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking anticipatory bail. 2. Heard Mr.P.Kumaresan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.K.S.Duraipandian, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.343 of 2011 against the petitioner and 6 other name accused and 18 unnamed accused for the offence under Sections 147, 148 I.P.C., and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act on the basis of the complaint given by the Contractor of Panchayat Union. 4. He would further submit that the case of prosecution is that on 05.11.2011, at about 11.00 a.m., A2 along with other accused came to the Panchayat Union Office with armed weapons and caused damaged to J.C.B, which is worth about Rs.25,000/-. 5. He would further submit that the other accused persons were already granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 12.11.2011 made in Crl.OP(MD)No.14538 and 14681 of 2011. He would further submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner is having permanent residence and therefore, he would request the Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit in his argument that the petitioner has got 5 previous case viz., Crime No.286 of 2002 for the offence under Sections 147, 341, and 188 I.P.C., crime No.98 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 143, 188 I.P.C., read with 177 M.V.Act, Crime No.104 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 4(1)(A) of TNPPDL Act, Crime No.315 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 143, 188 read with 171(H) of Tamil Nadu City Police Act and Crime No.280 of 2003 for the offence under Sections 341, 302 read with 109 I.P.C. He would further submit that in Crime No.280 of 2003, the petitioner herein was arrayed as A3 and he was acquitted in that case. He would further submit that the case is under investigation and hence, he request the Court to dismiss the anticipatory application. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I could see that the petitioner has involved in five other cases, out of which, one case is under Section 302 I.P.C., in which, the petitioner was acquitted of the charges. Further, the petitioner was also released on bail some other case and in this case also, other co-accused have already been granted anticipatory bail. Since, the petitioner is having permanent residence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners but with stringent conditions: 8. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before the Judicial Magistrate concerned on condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai, to the credit of Crime No.343 if 2011 on the file of the respondent Police and on such deposit, the petitioner shall execute 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 Judicial Magistrate Court, Manamadurai and on further condition that the petitioner shall stay at Tiruchy and appear before the Cantonment Police Station, Tiruchy, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. 9. The petitioner shall appear before the Magistrate concerned within a period of 15 days, failing which, the anticipatory bail granted shall stand automatically cancelled. sd/- 22/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MANAMADURAI. 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGANGAI. 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUPPUVANAM POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT. 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CONTONMENT POLICE STATION, TIRUCHY. 5. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. P.KUMARESAN Advocate SR. No.40956 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.15155 of 2011 Date :22/11/2011 RJ/23.11.11 (IT) 2p/7c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/