Madras High Court
CRL OP(MD)/23528/2013 of MAHALINGAM Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE on 30 December 2013
BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Thirtieth day of December Two Thousand Thirteen PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.23528 of 2013 1 MAHALINGAM 2 SHANMUGAM 3 NAGANATHAN 4 MUTHUVEL 5 KALIMUTHU ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4 & 6 Vs THE
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Monday, the Thirtieth day of December Two Thousand Thirteen PRESENT
THE HON`BLE MR JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH
CRL OP(MD) No.23528 of 2013
1 MAHALINGAM
2 SHANMUGAM
3 NAGANATHAN
4 MUTHUVEL
5 KALIMUTHU ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4 & 6
Vs
THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVADANAI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.
CR.NO. 255 OF 2013 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT
FOR PETITIONER : M/S.D.VENKATESH ADVOCATEFOR RESPONDENT : MR.A.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL UNDER SEC. 438 CR.P.C.
ORDER : THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER :- The petitioners/accused 1 to 4 and 6 apprehending arrest at the handsof the respondent police for the alleged commission offences punishableunder sections 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 342, 324 and 506(ii) of IPC inCrime No.255 of 2013 on the file of the respondent police seekanticipatory bail.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that thepetitioners and the defacto complainant are close relatives and thepetitioners are no way connected with the alleged occurrence. He wouldfurther submit that even as per the case of the prosecution, A-1 onlyattacked the defacto complainant and other accused tried to attack thedefacto complainant. He has also made an endorsement seeking permissionof this Court to withdraw this petition in respect of the firstpetitioner/A-1.
3.The learned Government Advocate (criminal side) would submit thatinjured has been discharged from the hospital.
4.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and alsoconsidering the fact that injured has been discharged from the hospital,this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners 2 to 5 on anticipatorybail. This petition is dismissed as withdrawn in respect of the firstpetitioner/A-1 alone.
5.Accordingly, the petitioners 2 to 5 are ordered to be released onhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learnedJudicial Magistrate, Thiruvadanai and on each of them executing a bondfor a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrateconcerned and on further condition that the petitioners 2 to 5 shallappear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period oftwo weeks and thereafter as and when required. The petitioners 2 to 5shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C.,scrupulously.
6.The petitioners 2 to 5 shall appear before the concerned Magistratewithin a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy madeready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail standsdismissed.
sd/-
30/12/2013
/ TRUE COPY /
Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai - 625 023.
TO
1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUVADANAI.
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVADANAI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM. THIRUVADANAI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM.
4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S.D.VENKATESH Advocate SR.No.64393.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
IN
CRL OP(MD) No.23528 of 2013
Date :30/12/2013
2P/6CRPB 31.12.2013