RAPPAN 12 V.CHINNASAMY NAICKER, 13 C.GOPALSAMY 14 S.JAGANNATHAN 15 N.SEENIVASAN 16 E.RAMASAMYNAICKER v. STATE REP.BYTHE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 120(b), 419, 463, 465, 468, 471
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and alsoconsidering the fact that the matter arises in relation to theelection of a society and the same has been preferred one year afterthe occurrence and also the investigation had already beentransferred to CBCID, Virudhunagar, this…
Judgment
Cause title
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT( Criminal Jurisdiction )Tuesday, the Twenty Second day of February Two Thousand ElevenPRESENTThe Hon`ble Mr.Justice C.T.SELVAMCRL OP(MD) No.1974 of 20111 S.SUBBURAJ 2 N.CHAKKARASAMY 3 S.SUNDARARAJ 4 R.KESAVAN 5 N.BASKARAN 6 PERUMALSAMY 7 K.VENKATESH 8 N.SUBBURAJ 9 K.NARAYANASAMY 10 SARGUNAN 11 R.SANKARAPPAN 12 V.CHINNASAMY NAICKER, 13 C.GOPALSAMY 14 S.JAGANNATHAN 15 N.SEENIVASAN 16 E.RAMASAMYNAICKER ..PETITIONERS
/ACCUSED Vs.STATE REP.BYTHE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH,VIRUDHU NAGAR DISTRICT.CR.NO.15 OF 2008
..RESPONDENT
/COMPLAINANTFor Petitioners : M/S.VEERA KATHIRAVAN AdvocateFor Respondent : MR.P.RAJENDRAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.
ORDER :
The Court Made the following order :-The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondentpolice for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 120(b), 419,463, 465, 468 and 471 I.P.C. in Crime No.15 of 2008, on the file ofthe respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.
The Court heard the submissions made by the learned counselappearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate(Criminal side) appearing for the respondent State.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners wouldsubmit that the petitioners have nothing to do with the allegedoffence as stated in the complaint. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit thatthe investigation had already been transferred to CBCID,Virudhunagar.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and alsoconsidering the fact that the matter arises in relation to theelection of a society and the same has been preferred one year afterthe occurrence and also the investigation had already beentransferred to CBCID, Virudhunagar, this Court is inclined to grantanticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitionersare ordered to be released on bail, in the event of their arrest oron their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate concernedand on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousandonly) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfactionof the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar and on furthercondition that the petitioners shall appear before the CBCID PoliceStation, Virudhunagar as and when required. sd/- 22/02/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II,VIRUDHUNAGAR.2 -Do-Thro' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATEVIRUDHUNAGAR AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR.3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICEDISTRICT CRIME BRANCH,VIRUDHU NAGAR DISTRICT.+1. CC to M/S. VEERA KATHIRAVAN Advocate SR.No.9457akm/23.02.11 /2p-6c/ ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.1974 of 2011 Date :22/02/2011
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.