1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Ninth day of July Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms. Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.9237 of 2011 1 C.DURAISAMY ALIAS DURAI 2 C.ARUMUGAM ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 1 & 2 Vs STATE BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE MUSIRI POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT. CRIME NO.323 OF 2011. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. N.SANKAR GANESH Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.RAMAR, Additional Public Prosecutor ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners are arrayed as A1 and A2 and they were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 31.05.2011 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 397 and 506(ii) I.P.C, in Crime No.323 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek bail. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that these petitioners worked in a Modern Rice Mill, Musiri and due to previous enmity between the Mill owner and these petitioners, a false a case has been registered against the petitioners under Sections 397 and 506(ii) I.P.C,. on the basis of the complaint given by the defacto complainant, who is also working in the said Rice Mill. He would further submit that the petitioners are in custody for more than 60 days and the investigation is considerably over and hence, he prays for enlargement on bail. 3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that due to some misunderstanding between the Mill owner and these petitioners, already a complaint has been preferred by the owner of the said Rice Mil on 28.05.2011, alleging that the petitioners have kidnapped her minor son and on the basis of the said complaint, a case has been registered under Section 366(A) in Crime No.319 of 2011. He would further submit that the said boy was secured on 30.05.2011 and the petitioners were enlarged on bail and in the present case, the investigation is going on and hence, he prays for dismissal of this application. 4.Considering the rival submissions made by both sides and also considering the fact that the earlier occurrence has been taken place on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 28.05.2011 and the boy was secured on 30.05.2011 and the present complaint has been preferred on 31.05.2011 and the investigation is considerably over, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 5. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on executing a separate 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, Musiri, Trichy District and on further condition that the petitioners shall report before the Court concerned daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. sd/- 29/07/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MUSIRI, TRICHY DISTRICT. 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TRICHY DISTRICT. 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE MUSIRI POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY. 5. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. N.SANKAR GANESH Advocate SR. No.25157 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.9237 of 2011 Date :29/07/2011 RJ/2.8.11 2p/7c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/