Geetha And Others vs State

G.Ilangovan, J

The petitioners, who were arrayed as accused persons apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under sections 294(b), 341, 323, 353, 332, 307, 506(i) and 379 IPC r/w section 21(4) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 in Crime No.202 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant, who is the of Tahsildar of Narasingapuram, he along with the revenue officials conducted inspection near Tiles Vinayagar Temple. At the time, one Kanthasamy drove JCB vehicle bearing registration No.TN-48-AT-7023. The de-facto complainant instructed him to stop the vehicle. The driver of the stopped the vehicle and the de-fato complainant collected the vehicle key and his mobile phone. While the de-facto complainant proceeded in his two wheeler, he was waylaid by Magesh, the President of Narasingampuram Panchayat, assaulted the de-facto complainant with stones, Similarly, Dhanapal and Mani also attacked the de-facto complainant on his neck region. He was taken to the Government Hospital, Thuraiyur, where on his statement, a complaint has been registered in Crime No.202 of 2023 for the offences as stated.

3.During the course of investigation, on the basis of the confession statement of A1, these petitioners were implicated as accused persons, who are the owners of the alleged vehicles.

4.Seeking anticipatory, these petitioners, who are the owners of the alleged vehicles are before this court.

5.Heard both sides.

6.The first petitioner is the owner of the vehicle bearing registration No.TN-48-AT-7023, but she was not present in the place of occurrence. The second petitioner is the owner of the tractor (TN-48-Y-0114) and trailer (TN-48-A-5463), who was also not present in the place of occurrence, at that time of alleged assault.

7.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that now, the petitioners are added as A5 and A6.

8.Considering the fact that the petitioners were not present at the time of the above said occurrence and they are only the owners of the alleged vehicles, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, (Special Court for MMDR Act Cases), Trichy) and on each of them executing 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 learned Judge concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am until further orders. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.