CRL OP(MD)/17982/2017 of TYSON Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE on 28 December 2017

BEFORE THE MADURAI 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.17982 of 2017

1 TYSON

2 AJITH

3 ANTHONY

4 RAJA ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1,2,4,&5

Vs

THE STATE BYTHE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KOODANKULAM POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT (CRIME NO.368 OF 2017)... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

For Petitioner : Mr.D.VENKATESH Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.ANBARASAN, Government Advocate (Crl.side)

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police forthe alleged offence punishable under Sections 379 IPC (sand theft)in Crime No.368 of 2017 on the file of the respondent police, thepetitioners have come forward with this petition seekinganticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners haveloaded one unit of sand each in two vehicles, namely, MahindraTipper bearing registration No.TN-65-C-9735 and Tata 407 Van bearingregistration No.TN-69-A-7189 and when the respondent police tried tointercept them, the petitioners escaped along with the vehicles.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that thepetitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated inthis case.

4.Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit thatthe petitioners 1 and 2 have three previous cases and petitioners 3https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/and 4 have no previous case.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case andtaking note of the fact that the quantity is minimal and thepetitioners 3 and 4 are having no previous case, this Court isinclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 3 and 4.However, considering the fact that petitioners 1 and 2 have threeprevious cases, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatorybail to them.

6. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed in respect ofpetitioners 1 and 2 and the petitioners 3 and 4 are ordered to bereleased on bail in the event of their arrest or appearance, withina period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of thisorder, before the Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor, on theirexecuting a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten ThousandOnly) each with two sureties each for a like sum to thesatisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer whointends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concernedand on further condition that:

[a] the petitioners 3 and 4 shall deposit a sum of Rs.2,500/-(Rupees Two Thousand and Five Hundred only) each to the credit ofCrime No.368 of 2017 before the learned Judicial Magistrate,Valliyoor; [b] the petitioners 3 and 4 shall report before the respondentpolice daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafteras and when required for interrogation. [c] the petitioners 3 and 4 shall not tamper with evidence orwitness either during investigation or trial.

[d] the petitioners 3 and 4 shall not abscond either duringinvestigation or trial.

[e] on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learnedMagistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actionagainst the petitioners 3 and 4 in accordance with law as if theconditions have been imposed and the petitioners 3 and 4 released onbail by the Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by theHon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIRSCW 5560].

sd/-

28/12/2017

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATEVALLIYOOR

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2 -do- thro' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATETIRUNELVELI DISTRICT

3

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICEKOODANKULAM POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI

+1. CC to M/S.D.VENKATESH Advocate SR.No.37106