VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2023 › High Court of Madras

Muthuganesh v. The Inspector of Police

ORDERED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
15 June 2023
Bench
G.K. Ilanthiraiyanauthor
Case no.
CRL OP(MD) 10626/2023

Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 15.06.2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD)No.10626 of 2023 Muthuganesh

... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs The Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar Bazaar Police Station, Virudhunagar District. (Crime No.45 of 2023) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.K.Rajeshwaran For Respondent : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi, Additional Public Prosecutor. For Intervenor : Mr.R.Chandra sekar, Advocate

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.45 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/sole accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 408 & 420 IPC in Crime No.45 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was working as bakery master in the defacto complainant's bakery and he requested money to construct house. The defacto complainant also gave Rs.10,00,000/- by pledging her 24 sovereigns of gold jewels. Thereafter, the petitioner did not return the money. He also received money for purchasing goods to bakery. However, he did not purchase any goods. Hence, the case.

3.Heard both sides and perused the materials available in the record.

4.It is seen that the petitioner was working under the defacto complainant for the past several years. For construction of house, he borrowed Rs.10,00,000/- from the defacto complainant by way of pledging 24 sovereigns of gold jewels. Now the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to redeem the jewels and return to the defacto complainant.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on condition that the petitioner shall redeem the gold jewels and return the same to the defacto complainant, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and produce receipt/acknowledgment before the trial Court, failing which, the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner shall stand cancelled automatically.

6.On such production of receipt/acknowledgment, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Virudhunagar, on condition that the petitioner shall execute 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity. [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, daily morning at 10.30 A.M., and evening 05.00 P.M., for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC. sd/- 15/06/2023 / TRUE COPY / /06/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. GNS TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I VIRUDHUNAGAR. 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VIRUDHUNAGAR BAZAAR POLICE STATION VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC to M/s.K.RAJESHWARAN, Advocate ( SR-8836[I] dated 15/06/2023 ) +1 CC to M/s.R.CHANDRASEKAR, Advocate ( SR-9025[I] dated 19/06/2023 ) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10626 of 2023 Date :15/06/2023 SS/BUC/23/06/2023/3P/7C

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.