Ravikumar@Ravichandran v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Second day of December Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.17863 of 2017 RAVIKUMAR @ RAVICHANDRAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.3 Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE UTHUMALAI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT (CRIME NO. 230 OF 2017) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : Mr.S.ALAGUSUNDAR 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/Accused No.3, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.10.2017 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 307, 387 and 506(ii) of IPC., in Crime No.230 of 2017, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on 11.10.2017, the petitioner along with the other accused demanded money from the defacto complainant for intoxication purpose and scolded him using filthy language and threatened him with weapons. On intervention of public, they fled away from the place of occurrence. Based on the complaint, a case has been registered against the petitioner and other accused persons for the above said offences and they were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.10.2017. 3.
The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Moreover, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner. He further submitted that the earlier bail petition filed by the petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.14934 of 2017 was dismissed by this Court on 06.11.2017. Further he submitted that challenging the first information report, the other accused persons/A1 and A2 filed a petition in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.
and the same was quashed on the ground of compromise by this Court on 09.11.2017. He further submitted that the detention order issued against the petitioner was also revoked by the Deputy Secretary to Government on 12.12.2017, based on the Advisory Committee report. Hence, he prays for bail.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent did not dispute the facts submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to the following conditions: (i) the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alangulam;
(ii)the petitioner shall report before the investigation officer as and when required by the investigation officer;
(iii)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (iv) the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail;
(v) 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 and the bail granted stands cancelled automatically.
sd/- 22/12/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ALANGULAM
2 -DO- THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE UTHUMALAI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT 4 THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, PALAYAMKOTTAI 5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to M/S.S.ALAGUSUNDAR Advocate SR.No.36881
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.17863 of 2017 Date :22/12/2017 PJL SH/RM/SAR-1:22.12.2017: 3P/7C