Madras High Court
CRL OP(MD)/18002/2017 of T.GAJENDRAN, Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, on 28 December 2017
BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Eighth day of December Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice S.VAIDYANATHAN CRL OP(MD) No.18002 of 2017 T.GAJENDRAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED Vs THE STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IDOL WING CID,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Thursday, the Twenty Eighth day of December Two Thousand SeventeenPRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr Justice S.VAIDYANATHAN
CRL OP(MD) No.18002 of 2017
T.GAJENDRAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED
VsTHE STATE REP.BY,THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IDOL WING CID, CHENNAI.
(CRIME NO.4 OF 2017) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
For Petitioner : M/S.R.ANAND Advocate
For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN, Government Advocate(Crl.Side)
PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested on 30.11.2017 and remanded tojudicial custody on the same day for the offences punishable underSections 457(2), 380(2), 202, 120(B) IPC r/w Section 25(1) ofAntiquities and Art Treasures Act in Crime No.4 of 2017 on the fileof the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, whois the Joint Commissioner of HR&CE Department of PasupatheeswararTemple, Pandanallur, is said to have indulged in the theft of anidol in connivance with other accused by replacing the originalManickavasagar Panchaloga Antique statue with the duplicate one,which resulted in registration of the present case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submittedthat the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and heis ready to abide by any conditions being imposed by this Court.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) has stronglyobjected to the grant of bail, contending that the investigation ofthe case is at the initial stage and if the petitioner/accused islet out on bail, there is every possibility of the accused tamperinghttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/the witnesses/evidences and hampering the investigation.
5. Taking into consideration the serious nature of theallegations levelled against this petitioner and the fact that theinvestigation of the case is in midway, this Court is not inclinedto grant the relief as prayed for by the petitioner.
6. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition standsdismissed accordingly.
sd/-
28/12/2017
/ TRUE COPY /
Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai - 625 023.
TO
1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
IDOL WING CID, CHENNAI.
2 THE SUPERINTENDENT,
CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY.
3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI
+1. CC to M/S.R.ANAND Advocate SR.No.19
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.18002 of 2017
Date :28/12/2017
PK/RR/SAR-1/03.01.2018 : 2P/5C