BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Thirty First day of January Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice C.T.SELVAM CRL OP(MD) No.1008 of 2011 1 CHELLAIAH 2 C. MUTHUMARI 3 C. HARIKRISHNAN 4 H. MUTHALAMMAL ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 1 TO 4 Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUCHENDUR TEMPLE POLICE STATION, TUTICORIN DISTRICT, CRIME NO.279/2009. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MR.V.KATHIRVELU , Senior Counsel for M/S. J.JEYAKUMARAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.P.RAJENDRAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners are arrayed as A1 to A4 and they were remanded to judicial custody on 15.02.2010 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 379 IPC, in Crime No.279 of 2009 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek bail. 2. Heard Mr.V.Kathirvelu, learned Senior Counsel for Mr.J.Jeyakumaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.P.Rajendran, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the state. 3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that these petitioners are the members of a family and alleged to have involved in as many as 40 cases. Of such cases, 19 have been registered on 02.07.2009, in respect of offence under Section 379 I.P.C. The petitioners 1 to 3 have been in judicial custody from 26.01.2010 and the 4th petitioner has been taken into custody on 15.02.2010. It is informed that on such date, the 4th petitioner was into her 8th month of pregnancy and she has delivered a child in jail. He further submits that the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ charge sheet has been filed in all the cases and the trial has been commenced in some of them. 4. The learned Government Advocate would strenuously object to grant of bail informing that these petitioners have a history of committing similar cases and that as the trial has been commenced in some and is likely to be commenced in the near future in the others, they ought to be required to await the out come of the trial. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the long period of detention under gone by them, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain stringent conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on each of them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only). Considering the fact that the petitioners have to provide sureties in several cases, this Court requires them to produce single sureties each belonging to Rajagopalapuram, Ramayanpatti, Tirunelveli District for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.II, Tirunelveli, and on further condition that the petitioners 1 to 3 shall report before the respondent police twice a day at 8.30 a.m. and 04.00 p.m. until further orders. The 4th petitioner shall appear once a day at 4.00 p.m. before the respondent police until further orders. Sd/- 31/01/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II,TIRUNELVELI 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUCHENDUR TEMPLE POLICE STATION, TUTICORIN DISTRICT 4 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PALAYAMKOTTAI 5 THE OFFICER IN CHARGE, KOKKARAKULAM SUB JAIL, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT 6 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S. J.JEYAKUMARAN Advocate SR.No.3478 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.1008 of 2011 Date :31/01/2011 PAM 03.02.2011/8C/2P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/