BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Fifteenth day of December Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.16379 of 2011 1 A. MOHAMMED SHERIFF 2 M. SYED ABDUL KADAR 3 M. FAZARDEEN 4 F. ANWAR JAHAN 5 Z. KISHORE JAHAN ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 1 5O 5 Vs STATE REP BY:: THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE OTHAKADAI POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT, CRIME NO.232/2011 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.V.A.DHANA ARAVINDHA BALAJI Advocate For Respondent : MR. K.S. DURAIPANDIAN,ADDITIONAL PUBLIC POROSECUTOR PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners are arrayed as A1 to A5 and they prayed for grant of anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C., for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 341 and 506 (ii) r/w.109 I.P.C., in Crime No.232 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.Heard Mr.A.A.Dhana Aravindha Balaji, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.K.S.Duraipandian, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit in his argument that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence. He would further submit in his argument that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and hence, he prays for anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioners. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit in his argument that the petitioners are trespassing into the property of the de-facto complainant and threatened him with dire consequences and if for any reason, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, stringent conditions may be imposed for the secured presence of the petitioners. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Considering the age of the first petitioner that he is not able to move and he is permitted to furnish personal bond only either at the time of arrest or appearing before the learned Judicial Magistrate. Accordingly, the petitioners No.2 to 5 are directed to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur and each of them executing a 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, Melur and on further condition that the petitioners No.2 to 5 shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. 6.The petitioners shall appear before the Magistrate concerned within a period of 15 days, failing which, the anticipatory bail granted shall stand automatically cancelled. sd/- 15/12/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MELUR, MADURAI DISTRICT 2 DO THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI 3 THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT MADURAI 4 THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE OTHAKADAI POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT 2CC to M/S.V.A.DHANA ARAVINDHA BALAJI Advocate SR.No.43878: DM::2011:DECEMBER:19:: ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.16379 of 2011 2P:7C:: Date :15/12/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/