1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Ninth day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.15584 of 2011 1.KRISHNAN 2.PANDIAMMAL 3.MUTHUPANDI 4.KASTURI 5.BALU 6.PANDIAN @ RICHSHAW PANDIAN 7.VETTU MANI @ MANIKANDAN 8.K.MAHENDRAN 9.BHARATHI ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED A2 TO A8 & A10, A11 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VILATHIKULAM POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT, CRIME NO.124/2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. K.CHELLAIAH Advocate For Respondent : MR. K.S.DURAI PANDIAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners/Accused A-2 to A-8, A-10 and A-11 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 465, 466, 468, 472 and 120(b) of IPC, in Crime Number 124 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3.According to the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are said to have been attempted to furnish fake solvency certificates, while they were executing substantial sureties. He would further submit that the petitioners are only coolie workers and they are not the main accused in this case, and the main accused were already arrested and these petitioners are not aware of the alleged crime committed by A-1. He would further submit that the petitioners are innocent and therefore they may be granted anticipatory bail. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit in his argument that among the petitioners, 6th petitioner/accused No.7 was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 arrested and remanded to custody. He would further submit the offence committed by the petitioners is a serious one and investigation is pending. 5.Considering the submissions made by both sides, this Court could see that the allegation against the petitioners are that they have attempted to deceive the court and it was found by one Bench Clerk of the said court. Considering the gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioners, requests for permission to surrender themselves before the court concerned and to seek for bail. 6.Accordingly, the petitioners are permitted to to do so and it is for the said Court to consider the said plea of the petitioners, preferably on the same day, purely on merits. 7.With the aforesaid observation, this petition is dismissed. sd/- 29/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, THOOTHUKUDI 2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VILATHIKULAM POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. K.CHELLAIAH Advocate SR.No.41834 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.15584 of 2011 Date :29/11/2011 TR : 02.12.2011: 2p/5c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/