IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.

V, COIMBATORE
Presence :A.PRABU ,M.L., PGD IPL.,
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-I
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V(FAC)
COIMBATORE.
Wednesday, 18th day of November 2020
C.M.P. No.3747 Of 2020
CR.NO.1059 OF 2020

Paul Immanuel –---- Petitioner /Third Party

S/o.Thangaraj
/vs/

The Inspector of Police,

PN Palayam P.S
Cr.No. 1059/2020
Coimbatore . –---Respondent / Complainant
U/S.379 IPC
ORDER

1. This application was filed u/s 451 , 457 of crpc, on behalf of the petitioner by
Advocate S.Prasanth, B.A.,B.L.,, and this application has been received through E-mail,
seeking for interim custody of Ashok Leyland Dost Vehicle TN 38 CF 3253 which is seized
by the respondent/police in above crime number. Police submitted reply on 11.11.2020.
After considering this application, reply and submission of counsel through email,this court
passed the following order.

2. The counsel for the petitioner/Accused submitted that the petitioner is the absolute
owner of the vehicle. The petitioner ready to submit original RC book before this Hon'ble
Court and also ready to excite a bond of undertaking that he will not sell the vehicle or
change the form of the vehicle. He also undertakes that he will produce the vehicle as per
the orders of this Hon'ble Court. He is ready to abide any condition that may be imposed by
this Hon'ble Court.
3. Notice was sent through email to police. In the reply submitted by police on
5th November , The Police has no objection to return the case property.

4. Material submitted through email , reply and case materials are carefully perused and
considered. The petitioner appeared before this court and produced aadhar card and RC
Book before this court to substantiate his claim over the property. On perusal of case
records, the Petitioner is the owner of the property. Considering the nature of the offence
and the nature of the case as well as objection raised by the prosecution, this court is
inclined to grant interim custody of the property TN 38 CF 3253 எனனற எணனண ளனள ஐவரர
கலரன Ashok Leyland Dost Van ஒனனற Chasis No:MB1AA22E8GRW43815
ENGINE NO.WGHO32841P Model:2016 in PR.No.467/20 dated:10.11.2020 to the
petitioner.

In fine, this application is Allowed accordingly with the following conditions.

1. The petitioner shall execute a own bond for Rs. 5,00,000/-.

2. The petitioner shall produce the R.C.Book Xerox before this court.
3. The petitioner shall produce the photo copies of the property taken in different
angels.
4. The photo copies of the property to be attested by both the petitioner.
5. The petitioner shall also produce the property at the time of trial as same conditions.
6. The petitioner shall not sell or alter in anyway encumber the property.

Dictated to Steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced in open court on

this the 18th day of November 2020.

/sd/A.Prabu
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V(FAC)
COIMBATORE
 IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE No.VI, COIMBATORE.

PRESENT : Thiru.K.R.Kannan,B.A., B.L.,

Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Coimbatore.
C.M.P. No.3876/2020
in
Cr. No.72/2020
Thursday the 19th day of November 2020
Lakhshmanan,
S/o.Venugopal .. Petitioner/Accused

/ VERSUS /
Inspector of Police,
Coimbatore Railway PS.,
Cr.No: 72/2020
U/s : 379 IPC .. Respondent/Complainant.

ORDER
The bail application in CMP.No. 3876/2020 received by this court through
e-mail. The respondent/police submitted their reply through e-mail on
19.11.2020

After carefully consideration of the bail application and the reply submitted
by the respondent/police this court passed the following order,

The petitioner is the accused in the above crime number. The

Petitioner/accused was arrested and remanded to Judicial custody U/s. 379 IPC
on 23.10.2020. For the past 28 days the petitioner is in Judicial custody. The
case of the prosecution is on the date of occurrence when the defacto
complainant is waiting in the reservation counter in the railway station at that
time the defacto complainant placed his hand bag in the occurrence place and
booked the ticket. Then the defacto complainant noticed his bag was lost. On
investigation the petitioner was arrested with the bag of the defacto complainant.

This is the 2nd bail application and it was submitted the accused was
arrested for the alleged offence U/s.379 IPC. The petitioner was falsely
implicated in this case. In the application it was further submitted the petitioner
has never committed any offence in the FIR as alleged by the respondent/police.
He is an innocent person and he is a law abiding citizen. It was further stated if
the petition is allowed he will produce substantial sureties and he will not
abscond. On this grounds the petitioner asked this court to grant bail.

In the reply the respondent/police has stated on the date of occurrence the
petitioner took the bag of the defacto complainant containing Rs.14,000/- and
Identification documents. In the reply the respondent police further stated the
investigation is still pending and if the petitioner is released on bail he may
abscond. On this grounds the respondent police strongly opposed the bail
application.

On perusal of the records and as per the reply the petitioner was arrested
and remanded to judicial custody on 23.10.2020 for the alleged offence U/s.379
IPC. For the past 28 days the petitioner is in judicial custody. The investigation
is still pending. The respondent police has recovered the case property and same
was handed over to the defaco complainant as per orders passed by this court in
CMP.No.1996/2020. Hence, Considering the circumstances, remand period and
the case property was also recovered by the prosecution and considering the
Covid-19 Pandamic Situation in the interest of justice this court is inclined to
grant bail to the petitioner with the following conditions.

1. The petitioner shall produce two sureties like some each to the value of
Rs.10,000/- to the satisfaction of this court.
2. The petitioner and the sureties are directed to produce their ID proof.
3. The petitioner is directed to sign before the respondent/ police daily
at 10.30 AM for the period of 15 days.
4. The petitioner is directed to co-operate the investigation and shall not
tamper the evidence.

The order is typed, corrected and pronounced by me via email on 19 th

NOVEMBER of 2020.

Sd/-K.R.Kannan,
Judicial Magistrate No. VI,
Coimbatore.
 IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V, COIMBATORE
Presence :A.PRABU ,M.L., PGD IPL.,
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-I
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V(FAC)
COIMBATORE.
Thursday, 19th day of November 2020
C.M.P. No.3874 Of 2020
CR.NO.1115 OF 2020

Jeyachandran @ Hari (aged about 36 years)

S/o.Udhayakumar .. Petitioner/ Accused

/ Vs/
Inspector of Police,
B3 V.H.Road PS,
Coimbatore
Cr. No.1115 of 2020 ... Respondent/ Complainant

ORDER
Bail Application Filed U/s. 437 OF Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner by Advocate
Thiru.S.Manikandan, B.A.,B.L., and this application has been received through E-mail. Police
submitted reply on 19-11-2020. After considering bail application,FIR and submission of counsel
through email this court passed the following order.

2. From the materials available submitted through email it is seen that Accused is
charged for the offences under Sections 380(2) 411 IPC and he was arrested by the
respondent/police and he was remanded to judicial custody on 01.11.2020.

3. Notice was sent through email to police .In the reply submitted by police on 19th
November, police has raised strong objection in releasing the accused on bail stating that
investigation is still pending, if the accused released on bail, he will tamper the witnesses and
hamper the investigation. He may abscond and continue the same kind of offence. Absconding
accused is yet to be arrested
4. The petitioner/accused stated that the petitioner/accused is innocent person and has not
involved in any crime. He is doing electrician work and he is no way connected to the
present case.

5. Materials were perused. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, Nature of the
offence, objection and stage of the investigation, this court does not incline to grant bail to the
petitioner.

Hence, this petition is dismissed.

This order is dictated to the Steno-typist and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me
in open court on this the day of 19th November 2020.

/sd/A.Prabu
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V,
COIMBATORE (FAC)
 IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V, COIMBATORE
Presence :A.PRABU ,M.L., PGD IPL.,
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-I
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V(FAC)
COIMBATORE.
Wednesday, 18th day of November 2020
C.M.P. No.3941 Of 2020
CR.NO.844 OF 2020

Kongu Pandi (22/2020)

S.o.Murugesan .. Petitioner/ Accused
/ Vs/
Inspector of Police,
B12 Ukkadam PS,
Coimbatore
Cr. No. 844 of 2020 ... Respondent/ Complainant

ORDER
Bail Application Filed U/s. 436 OF Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner by Advocate
Thiru.NJR Viveka B.A.,B.L., and forwarded through email.

2. From the materials available submitted through email and on perusal of case records it is
seen that Accused is charged for the offences Under Sections 4(1)(a) of TNP ACT and he
was remanded to judicial custody on 16.11.2020.

3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner/accused is innocent and has not committed any
offence as alleged. He is a law abiding citizen and he will not abscond. He is prepared to furnish
substantial sureties.
4. Materials were perused. It is seen that offence is bailable in nature. Considering the facts and
circumstance of this case this court is inclined to grant bail to petitioner, accordingly this petition is
allowed and due to the pandemic spread of covid-19 the petitioner is release on bail with the
following conditions:

1) The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his execution of bond for Rs.10,000/- with one
surety.
2) The petitioner is directed to appear before this court on receipt of summon.
3.)The petitioner is directed to sign before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m until further
order.

In the result petition is Allowed.

Dictated to the Steno-typist and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in open court
on this the 18th day of November 2020.

/sd/A.Prabu
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V,
COIMBATORE (FAC)
 IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V, COIMBATORE
Presence :A.PRABU ,M.L., PGD IPL.,
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-I
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V(FAC)
COIMBATORE.
Thursday, 19th day of November 2020
C.M.P. No.3873 Of 2020
CR.NO.1041 OF 2020

P.Selvaraj
S/o.Palanisamy .. Petitioner/ Accused
/ Vs/
Inspector of Police,
B3 V.H.Road PS,
Coimbatore
Cr. No.1041 of 2020 ... Respondent/ Complainant

ORDER
Bail Application Filed U/s. 437 OF Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner by Advocate
Thiru.R.Sasikumar, B.Com.,.L.L.B, and this application has been received through E-mail. Police
submitted reply on 19-11-2020. After considering bail application,FIR and submission of counsel
through email this court passed the following order.

2. From the materials available submitted through email it is seen that Accused is charged
for the offences under Sections 354(c) IPC, 4 of TNPHW ACT and he was arrested by the
respondent/police and he was remanded to judicial custody on 19.11.2020.

3. Notice was sent through email to police .In the reply submitted by police on 19th
November, police has raised strong objection in releasing the accused on bail, stating that if
the accused released on bail, he will continue the same kind of offence and he will tamper the
witnesses and hamper the investigation.
4. The petitioner/accused stated that the petitioner/accused is innocent and has not
committed any offence as alleged. He is law abiding citizen and he will not abscond. He is
prepared to furnish substantial sureties.

5. On perusal of case records and the reply submitted by the police, and it is seen that
petitioner is judicial custody for more than 36 days. Considering the facts and circumstance of this
case, and nature of the offence and period of incarceration , this court is inclined to grant bail to
petitioner subject to the following condition .

1. The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- along with two sureties each to the like sum
amount.
2.The petitioner shall appear before the respondent Police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders.

This order is dictated to the Steno-typist and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me
in open court on this the day of 19th November 2020.

sd/A.Prabu
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V,
COIMBATORE (FAC)
 IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V, COIMBATORE
Presence :A.PRABU ,M.L., PGD IPL.,
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-I
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V(FAC)
COIMBATORE.
Thursday, 19th day of November 2020
C.M.P. No.3872 Of 2020
CR.NO.1068 OF 2020

R.Srinivasan (20)
S/o.Raman .. Petitioner/ Accused

/ Vs/
Inspector of Police,
M1 PN Palayam PS,
Coimbatore
Cr. No.1068 of 2020 ... Respondent/ Complainant

ORDER
Bail Application Filed U/s. 437 OF Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner by Advocate
Thiru.J.Muralidharan B.Sc. B.L., and this application has been received through E-mail. Police
submitted reply on 19-11-2020. After considering bail application,FIR and submission of counsel
through email this court passed the following order.

2. From the materials available submitted through email it is seen that Accused is
charged for the offences under Sections 379 IPC and he was arrested by the respondent/police
and he was remanded to judicial custody on 31.10.2020.

3. Notice was sent through email to police .In the reply submitted by police on 19th
November, police has raised strong objection in releasing the accused on bail stating that
investigation is still pending, if the accused released on bail, he will tamper the witnesses and
hamper the investigation. He may abscond and continue the same kind of offence.
4. The petitioner/accused stated that the petitioner/accused is a college student. He has not
voluntarily commits any offence at the occurrence place. He has falsely implicated in this
case. He was not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He is innocent and he has not
committed any offence. He is only bread winner of his family. He has not filed any similar
bail application before the Hon'ble judicature of Madras. He is ready to furnish necessary
sureties to the satisfaction of this Hon'ble any abide by any conditions imposed on him by
this Hon'ble court.

5. Materials were perused. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, Nature of the
offence, objection and stage of the investigation, this court does not incline to grant bail to the
petitioner.

Hence, this petition is dismissed.

This order is dictated to the Steno-typist and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me
in open court on this the day of 19th November 2020.

/sd/A.Prabu
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V,
COIMBATORE (FAC)
 IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V, COIMBATORE
Presence :A.PRABU ,M.L., PGD IPL.,
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-I
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V(FAC)
COIMBATORE.
Thursday, 19th day of November 2020
C.M.P. No.3871 Of 2020
CR.NO.1141 OF 2020

G.Sundaramoorthi
S/o.Gurusamy .. Petitioner/ Accused
/ Vs/
Inspector of Police,
B3 V.H.Road PS,
Coimbatore
Cr. No.1141 of 2020 ... Respondent/ Complainant

ORDER
Bail Application Filed U/s. 437 OF Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner by Advocate
Thiru.M.J.Salahudeen, B.A.,.B.L., and this application has been received through E-mail. Police
submitted reply on 19-11-2020. After considering bail application,FIR and submission of counsel
through email this court passed the following order.

2. From the materials available submitted through email it is seen that Accused is charged
for the offences under Sections 5,7 (3) Lottery Regulation ACT and he was arrested by the
respondent/police and he was remanded to judicial custody on 09.11.2020.

3. Notice was sent through email to police .In the reply submitted by police on 19th
November, police has raised strong objection in releasing the accused on bail, stating that if
the accused released on bail, he will continue the same kind of offence and he will tamper the
witnesses and hampet the investigation.
4. The petitioner/accused stated that the petitioner/accused is innocent and not committed
any alleged offence as stated by the respondent. He is the permanent resident of Coimbatore
and he is law abiding citizen. He is only bread winner of the family. He accepts any
condition if passed by this Honorable Court. There is no previous case before any police
station .

5. On perusal of case records and the reply submitted by the police, and it is seen that
petitioner is judicial custody for more than 11 days. Considering the facts and circumstance of this
case, and also considering the quantity of Lottery Tickets in the possession of accused person,
nature of the offence and period of incarceration , this court is inclined to grant bail to petitioner,
subject to the following condition . The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- along with
two sureties each to the like sum amount the petitioner shall appear before the respondent Police
daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders.

This order is dictated to the Steno-typist and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me
through email on this the day of 19th November 2020.

/sd/A.Prabu
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V,
COIMBATORE (FAC)
 IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V, COIMBATORE
Presence :A.PRABU ,M.L., PGD IPL.,
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-I
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V(FAC)
COIMBATORE.
Thursday, 19th day of November 2020
C.M.P. No.3752 Of 2020
CR.NO.817 OF 2020

Arun @ Arun Kumar @ Jocker @ Jockey

S/o.Ravindran .. Petitioner/ Accused
/ Vs/
Inspector of Police,
R5 Alandurai PS,
Coimbatore
Cr. No.817 of 2020 ... Respondent/ Complainant

ORDER
Bail Application Filed U/s. 437 OF Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner by Advocate
Thiru.S.Rajendran, B.A.,.B.L., and this application has been received through E-mail. Police
submitted reply on 19-11-2020. After considering bail application,FIR and submission of counsel
through email this court passed the following order.

2. From the materials available submitted through email it is seen that Accused is charged
for the offences under Sections 379 IPC and he was arrested by the respondent/police and he
was remanded to judicial custody on 05.10.2020.

3. Notice was sent through email to police .In the reply submitted by police on 19th
November, police has raised strong objection in releasing the accused on bail, Investigation in
this case is still pending, and if the accused released on bail, he will tamper the witnesses and
hamper the investigation.
4. The petitioner/accused stated that the petitioner/accused no way connected in this case.
He is innocent and they had been falsely implicated in this case. The conclusion of the
proceedings may take reasonable long time and the petitioners have to languish in jail for no
fault of his own. He would adversely reflect on his physical and mental health. He is having
permanent residence. He will neither abscond nor tamper the witness. He is only bread
winner of his family. He is ready to produce sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the
learned Judicial Magistrate No.V. Coimbatore and ready to abide any condition.

5. On perusal of case records and the reply submitted by the police, and it is seen that
petitioner is judicial custody for more than 46 days. Considering the facts and circumstance of this
case, and period of incarceration , this court is inclined to grant bail to petitioner, subject to the
following condition .

1.The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- along with two sureties each to the like sum
amount.
2. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent Police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders.

This order is dictated to the Steno-typist and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me
in open court on this the day of 19th November 2020.

/sd/A.Prabu
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V,
COIMBATORE (FAC)
 IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V, COIMBATORE
Presence :A.PRABU ,M.L., PGD IPL.,
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-I
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V(FAC)
COIMBATORE.
Thursday, 19th day of November 2020
C.M.P. No.3870 Of 2020
CR.NO.1067 OF 2020

Megharaj (age 24)

S/o.Balakrishnan .. Petitioner/ Accused

/ Vs/
Inspector of Police,
M1 PN Palayam PS,
Coimbatore
Cr. No.1067 of 2020 ... Respondent/ Complainant

ORDER
Bail Application Filed U/s. 437 OF Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner by Advocate
Thiru.D.Jegannathan and this application has been received through E-mail. Police submitted reply
on 19-11-2020. After considering bail application,FIR and submission of counsel through email
this court passed the following order.

2. From the materials available submitted through email it is seen that Accused is
charged for the offences under Sections 379 IPC and he was arrested by the respondent/police
and he was remanded to judicial custody on 31.10.2020.

3. Notice was sent through email to police .In the reply submitted by police on 19th
November, police has raised strong objection in releasing the accused on bail stating that
investigation is still pending, if the accused released on bail, he will tamper the witnesses and
hamper the investigation. He may abscond and continue the same kind of offence.
4. The petitioner/accused stated that the petitioner/accused is sole breadwinner of his aged
mother and his family. Without investigation the respondent police foisted this false and put
up the case against the petitioner. He is not involved in any such case and no previous case
is pending against him. He is having permanent residence. He will neither abscond nor
tamper the witnesses .

5. Materials were perused. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, Nature of the
offence, objection and stage of the investigation, this court does not incline to grant bail to the
petitioner.

Hence, this petition is dismissed.

This order is dictated to the Steno-typist and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me
in open court on this the day of 19th November 2020.

/sd/A.Prabu
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V,
COIMBATORE (FAC)
 1

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE / PRESIDING OFFICER,

SPECIAL COURT FOR ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT CASES, COIMBATORE.

PRESENT : TMT. T. MALARVALANTINA,M.L.,

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE / PRESIDING OFFICER,
SPECIAL COURT FOR ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT CASES, COIMBATORE.

THURSDAY, THE 19th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020.

C.M.P.No. 343 /2020

Erannan,
S/o Raju. ...Petitioner/accused No.2

Vs.

State Rep by Inspector of Police,

Kadambur Police Station,
Crime No. 184/2020. ... Respondent/ Complainant.

This is a bail application filed on 07.11.2020 u/s 439 of Cr.P.C. by

Advocates Thiru R. Kalairasu, on behalf of the petitioner/ accused No.2 and
Thiru S.P.Chandra sekar, Special Public Prosecutor for the Respondent/ Complainant
and on perusing the documents, this court passed the following :-

ORDER
The petitioner/Accused was in judicial custody from 20.09.2020. The
Kadambur Police registered the FIR U/s. 8(c) r/w 20(a)(i), 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS
Act.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the ganja plants weighed about 2.000
kgms were cultivated by the petitioner/Accused No.2 and two others namely
Nagappan(Nagan)(A1) and one absconding accused Mahendran.

3. In view of the nation vide lock down, for Covid 19 virus pandemic, to
avoid physical contacts and to maintain social distancing courts in Tamil Nadu
are function through virtual mode. Hence the petitioner has filed this petition
through e-mail to this court e-mail account. Hence the above said bail application
filed on line was taken on file, and assigned a CMP No. 343/2020.
 2

4. On behalf the petitioner/accused, the learned counsel for the petitioner/

accused submitted this written bail petition as follows:

The petitioner/accused has been charged for an alleged offence under section
8(c) , 20(a)(i), 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act and he was remanded to judicial custody on
20.09.2020. The petitioner/accused is innocent and he has not committed any
offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner is having permanent
residence and he will neither abscond nor tamper the witnesses if he is enlarged
on bail. This is the 2nd bail application and the 1st bail application was dismissed
in CMP No. 286/2020 on 03.11.2020 by this Honourable Court. The petitioner is in
judicial custody for the past 61 days. He is ready to abide by any condition
imposed by this Honourable Court and he is ready to furnish sufficient sureties to
the satisfaction of this Honourable Court. Therefore the learned counsel for the
petitioner prays to release the petitioner/accused No.2 on bail.

5. Notice issued to the Special Public Prosecutor. Heard the Special Public
prosecutor. He submitted that If the accused is released on bail, there are every
chances of his abscondance and he will indulge in similar activities.
Investigation is also not yet completed in this case. Hence the Special Public
Prosecutor is strongly objected to release the accused on bail.

6. Records perused. The petitioner / accused is remanded to judicial custody

on 20.09.2020 for an alleged offence U/s. 8(c) r/w 20(b) (ii)(B) of NDPS Act. The
accused is in judicial custody for the past 61 days. Further in this case, the
accused No. 1 Nagappan (Nagan) was released on 23.09.2020, as per this court's
order in Special CMP No. 218/2020. The another accused by name Mahendran(A3)
is still absconding. In this case the case properties were produced before this court
and remanded in PR No.123/2020. The samples were sent for chemical analysis
on the same day. The analysis report is awaited. By this time most part of the
investigation would have been completed. Considering the above all and the
 3

detention period of the accused, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner/
accused .

7. Accordingly, this petition is allowed with following conditions:-

1. The petitioner/ accused is ordered to be released on bail on his executing

a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties each for a likesum to the
satisfaction of this court and out of the two sureties, one surety must be close
relative /parents/spouse of the petitioner/accused.

2. The petitioner on his release from prison, shall stay at Kadambur and
report before the Inspector of Police, Kadambur Police Station, daily at 10.30
a.m. until further orders. The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent
police as and when required for interrogation.

3. The petitioner is directed to file surety memo along with stamp arrears
and surety documents in drop box, thereafter time and date for appearance will be
intimated to the petitioner's counsel through e-mail.

4. The sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in
the surety, further the sureties has to produce copy of their Aadhar card or any
Identification proof to ensure their identity.

5. The petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature; the
petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial and the petitioner
shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

6. If the accused / petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered

Section 229A IPC.

7. Further the accused shall produce his proof of identification and

residential proof and recent photo of accused..

This order is dictated by me and computerized by the steno-typist on this

the 19th day of November 2020.

T. Malarvalantina,
ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE/ PRESIDING OFFICER,
SPECIAL COURT FOR EC ACT CASES,
COIMBATORE.
 1

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE / PRESIDING OFFICER,

SPECIAL COURT FOR ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT CASES, COIMBATORE.

PRESENT : TMT. T. MALARVALANTINA,M.L.,

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE / PRESIDING OFFICER,
SPECIAL COURT FOR ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT CASES, COIMBATORE.

THURSDAY, THE 19th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020.

C.M.P.No. 346/2020

Vijayakumar,
S/o Kalimuthu ...Petitioner/accused No.1.

Vs.

State Rep by Inspector of Police,

Sulur Police Station,
Crime No. 1857 /2020. ... Respondent/ Complainant.

This is a bail application filed on 09.11.2020 u/s 37 of NDPS Act r/w

439 of Cr.P.C. by Advocates Thiru E. Ganesh and S.Arunpransanth on behalf of
the petitioner/accused No.1 and Thiru S.P.Chandrasekar, Special Public Prosecutor
for the Respondent/ Complainant and on perusing the documents, this court passed
the following :-

ORDER
The petitioner/Accused No.1 was in judicial custody from 08.10.2020 for an
offence U/s.8(c) r/w 20(b) (ii) (B), 25 & 29(1) of NDPS Act.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/Accused No.1 and one another
accused by name Damburo Rout ( A2) were found to be in unlawful possession of
1.250kgms of ganja in a two wheelers Yamaha Fascino bearing Registration No.
TN 66 X 0861 and one Bajaj Pulsar bearing Registration No. TN37 DW3946.

3. In view of the nation vide lock down, for Covid 19 virus pandemic, to
avoid physical contacts and to maintain social distancing courts in Tamil Nadu
are function through virtual mode. Hence the petitioner has filed this petition
through e-mail to this court e-mail account. Hence the above said bail
 2

application filed on line was taken on file, and assigned a CMP No. 343/2020.
4. On behalf the petitioner/accused No.1, the learned counsel for the petitioner/
accused submitted this written bail petition as follows:

The petitioner/accused has been charged for an alleged offence under

section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B), 25 & 29(1) of NDPS Act and he was remanded to
judicial custody on 08.10.2020. The respondent police had falsely registered
the case against the petitioner without proper investigation. Investigation is almost
over. The petitioner is innocent and a law abiding citizen. The petitioner has
not committed any such offence as alleged by the respondent police. He is the
bread winner of his family, his continuous custody will put them in trouble and his
life will become miserable. He will not flee from justice or interfere in the
investigation of respeondent police or tamper the witnesses. He undertakes to obey
any condition imposed by this Honourable Court. He undertakes to provide
sufficient sureties for his release on bail before this Honourable Court. Therefore
the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to release the petitioner/accused No.1
on bail.

5. Notice issued to the Special Public Prosecutor. The Special Public

prosecutor is strongly objected to release the petitioner/accused on bail.

6. Records perused. The petitioner/accused is remanded to judicial custody

on 08.10.2020 for an alleged offence U/s. 8(c) r/w 20(b) (ii)(B) 25 & 29(1)of NDPS
Act. The accused is in judicial custody for the past 43 days. The quantity of
ganja recovered in this case is 1.250kgms. Even though the case properties were
seized on 08.10.2020, but the same have not been produced before this court till
date. The co accused has already been released on bail by this Court. By this time
most part of the investigation would have been completed. Considering the
period of detention and the quantity of ganja recovered in this case, this court is
inclined to grant bail to the petitioner/accused No.1 .
 3

7. Accordingly, this petition is allowed with following conditions.

1. The petitioner/ accused No.1 is ordered to be released on bail on his

executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties each for a likesum to
the satisfaction of this court and out of the two sureties, one surety must be close
relative /parents/spouse of the petitioner/accused No.1.

2. The petitioner on his release from prison, shall stay at Sulur and report
before the Inspector of Police, Sulur Police Station, daily at 10.30 a.m. until
further orders. The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent police as
and when required for interrogation.

3. The petitioner is directed to file surety memo along with stamp arrears
and surety documents in drop box, thereafter time and date for appearance will be
intimated to the petitioner's counsel through e-mail.

4. The sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in
the surety, further the sureties has to produce copy of their Aadhar card or any
Identification proof to ensure their identity.

5. The petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature; the
petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial and the petitioner
shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

6. If the accused / petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered

Section 229A IPC.

7. Further the accused shall produce his proof of identification and residential
proof and recent photo of accused.

This order is dictated by me and computerized by the steno-typist on this

the 19th day of November 2020.

T. Malarvalantina,
ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE/ PRESIDING OFFICER,
SPECIAL COURT FOR EC ACT CASES,
COIMBATORE.
 1

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE / PRESIDING OFFICER,

SPECIAL COURT FOR ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT CASES, COIMBATORE.

PRESENT : TMT. T. MALARVALANTINA,M.L.,

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE / PRESIDING OFFICER,
SPECIAL COURT FOR ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT CASES, COIMBATORE.

THURSDAY, the 19th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020.

C.M.P.No. 315/2020
1. Muneer,
S/o Mohamed.
2. Sherif,
S/o Mohamed ....Petitioner/accused No.1 and 2

Vs.
State Rep by Inspector of Police,
Madukkarai Police Station,
Crime No.1820/2020. ... Respondent/ Complainant.

C.M.P.NO. 316/2020

Annas,
S/o Asraf. ....Petitioner/accused No.3

Vs.
State Rep by Inspector of Police,
Madukkarai Police Station,
Crime No.1820/2020. ... Respondent/ Complainant.

The above two bail applications are filed on 02.11.2020 respectively u/s,
439 of Cr.P.C. r/w 37 of NDPS Act by Advocates Thiru S. Rajendran on behalf of
the Petitioners/Accused No.1 and 2 and Thiru K. Sakthivel, on behalf of the
Petitioner/Accused No.3 and Thiru. S.P. Chandrasekar, Special Public Prosecutor for
the Respondent/Complainant and on perusing the documents, this court passed the
following :-
COMMON ORDER

The petitioners/Accused No.1 to 3 were in judicial custody from 17.10.2020

for an offence U/s.8(c) r/w 20(b) (ii) (B) of NDPS Act.
 2

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners/Accused No. 2 and 3

were unlawfully ound to be in possession of 1.500kgms of ganja in a vehicle-
Lorry bearing registration No. KL 18 B 3798.

3. In view of the nation vide lock down, for Covid 19 virus pandemic, to
avoid physical contacts and to maintain social distancing courts in Tamil Nadu
are function through virtual mode. Hence the petitioners have filed these two
petitions through e-mail to this court e-mail account. Hence the above said bail
applications filed on line were taken on file, and assigned a CMP Nos.
315/2020 and 316/2020.

4. On behalf the petitioners/accused No.1 and 2, the learned counsel for

the petitioners/accused No.1 and 2 submitted this written bail petition as follows:

i) The respondent/complainant has registered a case against the petitioners

for an alleged offence u/s 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act. The petitioners were
remanded on 17.10.2020 and they are in judicial custody till now. The original
fact is that the petitioners are no way connected in this case. The petitioners
arrested only based on suspicion. They are innocent and they have been falsely
implicated in this case. The conclusion of the proceedings may tke reasonable long
time and the petitioner have to languish in jail for no fault of own. The continuous
detention of the petitioners would adversely reflect on his physical and mental
health. They are having permanent residence. They will not abscond or tamper
with the prosecution witnesses, if they are enlarged on bail by this Honourable
Court. They are ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Honourable
Court and they are ready to produce sufficient sureties as directed by this
Honourable Court. Therefore the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to release
the petitioners/ Accused No.1 and No. 2 on bail.
 3

ii) The Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.3 submitted this
written bail petition as follows:

The respondent/complainant has registered a case against the petitioner

for an alleged offence u/s 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act. The petitioners were
remanded on 17.10.2020 and he is in judicial custody for the past 22 days. The
original fact is that the petitioner is no way connected in this case. The petitioner
arrested only based on suspicion. He is innocent and he has been falsely
implicated in this case. The conclusion of the proceedings may take reasonable
long time and the petitioner have to languish in jail for no fault of own. The
continuous detention of the petitioners would adversely reflect on his physical
and mental health. He is having permanent residence. He will not abscond or
tamper with the prosecution witnesses if he is enlarged on bail by this Honourable
Court. He is ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Honourable Court
and he is ready to produce sufficient sureties as directed by this Honourable
Court. Therefore the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to release the
petitioner/ Accused No.3 on bail.
5. Notice issued to the Special Public Prosecutor. The Special Public
Prosecutor submitted that the accused a re belongs to other State, if the accused are
released on bail, there are every chances of their abscondance and also they will
tamper the prosecution witnesses. They will indulge in similar activities. Further
in this case investigation is also still in progress. Therefore the Special Public
prosecutor is strongly objected to the petitioner/accused on bail.

7. Written submissions perused. The petitioners/ accused No.1 to 3 are

remanded on 17.10.2020 and sent to judicial custody for an alleged offence U/s 8(c)
r/w 20(b) (ii) (B) of NDPS Act. The accused are in judicial custody for the past 34
days. The quantity of ganja recovered in this case is 1.500kgms. Even though
the case properties were seized on 17.10.2020, but the same have not been
produced before this court till date. Further by this time most part of the
 4

investigation would have been completed. Considering the facts and

circumstances of the case and the detention period of the accused, this court is
inclined to grant bail to the petitioners/accused No. 1 to 3 with conditions.

7. Hence, these two bail petitions are allowed with following conditions:

1. The petitioners/ accused No. 1 to 3 are ordered to be released on bail on

each of them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties each for
a likesum to the satisfaction of this court and out of the two sureties, one surety
must be close relative /parents/spouse of the petitioners/accused No. 1 to 3 .

2. The petitioners on their release from prison, shall stay at Madukkarai

and report before the Inspector of Police, Madukkarai Police Station, daily at
10.30 a.m. until further orders. The petitioners are directed to appear before the
respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

3. The petitioners are directed to file surety memo along with stamp arrears
and surety documents in drop box, thereafter time and date for appearance will be
intimated to the petitioners' counsel through e-mail.

4. The sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in
the surety, further the sureties has to produce copy of their Aadhar card or any
Identification proof to ensure their identity.

5. The petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature; the
petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial and the petitioners
shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

6. If the accused / petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered

Section 229A IPC.

7. Further the accused shall produce their proof of identification and

residential proof and recent photo of accused.

This order is dictated by me computerized by the steno-typist on this

th
the 19 day of November 2020.

T. Malarvalantina,
ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE/ PRESIDING OFFICER,
SPECIAL COURT FOR EC ACT CASES,
COIMBATORE.
 1

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE / PR ESIDING OFFICER,

SPECIAL COURT FOR ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT CASES, COIMBATORE.

PRESENT : TMT. T. MALARVALANTINA,M.L.,

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE / PRESIDING OFFICER,
SPECIAL COURT FOR ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT CASES, COIMBATORE.

THURSDAY, THE 19th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020.

C.M.P.No. 339 /2020

Jadaiyappan,
S/o Ajjey Gouwda. ...Petitioner/accused.

Vs.

State Rep by Inspector of Police

Hassanur Police Station,
Crime No. 77 /2020. ... Respondent/ Complainant.

This is a bail application filed on 06.11.2020 u/s, 439 of Cr. P.C r/w 37 of
NDPS Act by Advocates Thiru S. Rajamani, Thiru S. Stalin and Thiru P.R.
Prabhu on behalf of the Petitioner/ Accused and on hearing the learned counsel for
the petitioner and Thiru. S.P. Chandrasekar, Special Public Prosecutor for the
Respondent/Complainant and on perusing the documents, this court passed the
following :-
ORDER

The petitioner/Accused was remanded to judicial custody on 21.09.2020

for an offence U/s. 8(b) r/w 20(a)(i) of NDPS Act.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/Accused was cultivated

three ganja plants ( Total weighed about 6.000kgms ) in the back side near the
bath room of his house at 202 Seekatti, Areapalayam, Thalavaki (PO), Erode TK.

3. In view of the nation vide lock down, for Covid 19 virus pandemic, to
avoid physical contacts and to maintain social distancing courts in Tamil Nadu
are function through virtual mode. Hence the petitioner has filed this bail petition
through e-mail to this court's e-mail account. Hence the above said bail application
filed on line was taken on file, and assigned a CMP No. 339/2020.
 2

4. On behalf the petitioner/accused , the learned counsel for the petitioner/

accused submitted this written bail petition as follows:

The petitioner/accused has been charged for an alleged offence Under

Section 8(b) r/w 20(a)(i) of NDPS Act. The petitioner was remanded to judicial
custody on 21.09.2020. The petitioner/accused is a senior citizen aged about 70
years. He is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He is living
in a forest settlement area i.e. Reserve Forest Area. So the above said plants are
naturally sucked in air. He is judicial custody for the past 60 days. This is the
2nd bail application. The previous petition was dismissed by this Honourable court
in CMP No. 264/2020 dated 2010.2020. He is having permanent residence. He will
neither abscond nor tamper with the prosecution witnesses. He prepared to furnish
sureties and he is prepared to abide by any condition. Therefore the learned
counsel for the petitioner prays to release the petitioner/accused on bail.

5. Notice issued to the Special Public Prosecutor. Heard the Special Public
Prosecutor. Further he submitted that in this case the investigation is not yet
completed. If the accused is released on bail, there are every chance of his
abscondance and also the tamper the witnesses. The petitioner/accused indulge
in similar activities. Therefore the prosecution is strongly objected to release
the petitioner/accused on bail.

6. Written submissions and records perused. The petitioner/ accused was

remanded to judicial custody on 21.09.2020 for an alleged offence U/s. 8(b) r/w
20(a) (i) of NDPS Act. The accused is in judicial custody for the past 60 days. In
this case the case properties were produced before this court and remanded in PR
No.129/2020 and the same were sent for Forensic Science Laboratory,
Coimbatore for analysis. The analysis report is also received by this court on
20.10.2020. By this time most part of the investigation would have been
completed. Considering the above all and the detention period of the accused,
this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner/ accused .
 3

7. Accordingly, this petition is allowed with following conditions:-

1. The petitioner/ accused is ordered to be released on bail on his executing

a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with two solvency sureties each for a likesum to
the satisfaction of this court and out of the two sureties, one surety must be close
relative /parents/spouse of the petitioner/accused.

2. The petitioner on his release from prison, shall stay at Hassanur and
report before the Inspector of Police, Hassanur Police Station, daily at 10.30
a.m. until further orders. The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent
police as and when required for interrogation.

3. The petitioner is directed to file surety memo along with stamp arrears
and surety documents in drop box, thereafter time and date for appearance will be
intimated to the petitioner's counsel through e-mail.

4. The sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in
the surety, further the sureties has to produce copy of their Aadhar card or any
Identification proof to ensure their identity.

5. The petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature; the
petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial and the petitioner
shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

6. If the accused / petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered

Section 229A IPC.

7. Further the accused shall produce his proof of identification and

residential proof and recent photo of accused..

This order is dictated by me and typed by the steno-typist on this

the 19th day of November 2020.

T. Malarvalantina,
ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE/ PRESIDING OFFICER,
SPECIAL COURT FOR EC ACT CASES,
COIMBATORE.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru. R.SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3166/2020
(In C.A.205/2020)
C.A.No.205/2020 C.C.322/2020

(The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - I, Coimbatore.)

Offences: u/s.138 of NI Act.

(SI for a period of six months, and to pay a compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- to the
complainant within two months from the date of judgment, in default to undergo
SI for a period of two months.)
Benjamin Jacob … Petitioner / Appellant
/vs/

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. K. Venukadevi,
W/o.T.Ravindran … Respondents / Complainant

This petition is filed by the petitioner / appellant, u/s. 389(2) of Cr.P.C.,

praying to suspend the sentence till the disposal of appeal.
This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. A.Sharmila and K.R.Swaminathan, Advocate for the petitioner
/ Appellant, and Thiru M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State,
upon perusing the petition and this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner seeks suspension of sentence pending disposal of appeal.

 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this
Court and submitted that the petitioner has been found guilty of the offence u/s.
138 of NI Act, and the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to undergo SI
for a period of six months and to pay a compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- to the
complainant within two months from the date of judgment, in default to undergo SI
for a period of two months, for the offence u/s.138 of NI Act, imposed by the
learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - I, Coimbatore,
in C.C.No.322/2020, dated 16-10-2020. The learned counsel submitted that
petitioner has got fair defence and hence, prayed to suspend the sentence till the
disposal of the appeal. The learned counsel further requested to give reasonable
time to deposit the 20% of the compensation amount.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and has not
raised any serious objection to allow this petition.

4. This Court has considered the averments made in the petition. Negotiable
Instruments Act, has been amended vide Act 20/2018 w.e.f. 01-09-2018 and
thereby a new section 148 has been inserted in the parent Act. As per the said
amendment, the Appellate Court may order the appellant to deposit such sum
which shall be a minimum of twenty percent of the fine or compensation awarded
by the trial Court. Recently the Hon’ble Apex Court interpreted the Sec.148 of the
Negotiable Instrument Act in Surinder Singh Deswal @ Col.S.S.Deswal Vs
Virender Gandhi [Criminal Appeal Nos.917-944 of 2019, dated 29-05-2019] that
the Appellate Court shall direct the Appellant / Accused to deposit the sum which
shall not be less than 20% of the fine or compensation, either on an application
filed by the original complainant or even on the application filed by the Appellant /
Accused under Section 389(2) of the Cr.P.C. to suspend the sentence.

5. After considering all the above said aspects and following the dictum laid
down by the Apex Court, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case
and also considering the nature of offence and quantum of compensation amount
this Court is inclined to allow this petition and the substantive sentence of
imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by the lower Court alone is hereby
suspended till disposal of the appeal subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on his executing a bond for
Rs.10,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Judicial
Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level-I, Coimbatore, within 60 days
from the date of this order.
(ii) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.2,40,000/- towards the part of
compensation amount before the lower Court on or before 19-01-2021.

(iii) Final Order in respect of the deposit amount will be passed by the
Appellate Court at the time of disposal of the appeal.

(iv) The petitioner shall report before the trial Court on the 1 st working day of
every English calendar month at 10.30 a.m. without fail, until further orders.

The appeal is made over to the Ist Additional District & Sessions Court,
Coimbatore. The appeal stands posted to 23-12-2020.

On the failure of the petitioner, to comply with any of the above said
conditions, the suspension granted to him shall stand cancelled automatically and
the Magistrate concerned shall take necessary steps to secure the petitioner /
accused.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.
Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Ist Additional District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.

2. The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - I, Coimbatore.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
4. The Petitioner /appellant through his counsel.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru. R.SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3162/2020
(In C.A.No.203/2020)
C.A.No.203/2020 C.C.457/2016
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No. VII, Coimbatore.)
Offences: u/s.341 and 323 of IPC.
(Simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence u/s.341 of IPC and
simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence u/s.323 of IPC).
Nisar @ Nisharudeen (Age 23 years)
S/o. Jameesa
… Petitioner / Accused
/vs/

1. State represented by Inspector of Police,

D-4 Kuniyamuthur Police Station,
Coimbatore District.
(Crime No. 486/2015)
2. The State by Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore
… Respondents / Complainant

This petition is filed by the Petitioner / Accused praying to suspend the

sentence till the disposal of appeal.
This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. K.S.Pasupathy, S.Rajendran, K.Sakthivel and M.Vanathatchi,
Advocates for the petitioner / Accused, and Thiru M.Kanagaraj, Public
Prosecutor, represented for State, upon perusing the petition and having stood
over for consideration till this Court, this Court pronounced the following:-
 ORDER
Heard both side.

The petitioner seeks suspension of sentence pending disposal of appeal.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court
and submitted that the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to undergo
Simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence u/s.341 of IPC and
simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence u/s.323 of IPC,
imposed by the Judicial Magistrate Court No.VII, Coimbatore in
C.C.No.457/2016, dated 08-10-2020.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court
and submitted that the fine amount imposed upon the petitioner has been paid by
him and prayed to suspend the sentence.
The learned Public Prosecutor has not raised any serious objection to allow
the petition.
Considering the fact that the appeal has been preferred without any delay
and the further fact that the fine amount has been paid by the accused and the
sentence has been suspended by the lower Court and that there is no fear of his
running away, this Court is inclined to suspend the sentence of imprisonment alone
till the disposal of the appeal.
Hence the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner
by the lower Court alone is hereby suspended till disposal of the appeal, and the
petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail on him executing a bond for
Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the
Judicial Magistrate Court No. VII, Coimbatore, within two weeks from the date of
this order and on condition that the petitioner shall report before the trial Court on
the 1st working day of every English calendar month at 10.30 a.m. without fail,
until further orders.
The appeal is made over to the IVth Additional District & Sessions Court,
Coimbatore. The appeal stands posted to 23-12-2020.
On the failure of the petitioner, to comply with any of the above said
conditions, the suspension granted to them shall stand automatically cancelled and
the Magistrate concerned shall take necessary steps to secure the
petitioner/accused.
This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced
by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The IVth Additional District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.

2. The Judicial Magistrate, Court No. VII, Coimbatore.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
4. The Petitioner /appellant through his counsel.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru. R.SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3163/2020
(In C.A.No.204/2020)

C.A.No.204/2020 C.C.271/2017
(The Judicial Magistrate Court, Sulur.)
Offences: u/s.279 and 304(A) of IPC.
(A fine to pay a sum of Rs.500/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a
period of one month for the offence u/s.279 of IPC. Simple imprisonment for a
period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default SI for a period of three
months for the offence u/s.304(A) of IPC).
Jothi Ramalingam (Aged about 55 years)
S/o. Balasubramaniam
… Petitioner / Accused
/vs/

1. State represented by Inspector of Police,

Sulur Police Station,
Sulur.
(Crime No. 330/2015)
2. The State by Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore
… Respondents / Complainant

This petition is filed by the Petitioner / Accused praying to suspend the

sentence till the disposal of appeal.
This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. Santhosh Kumar and P.Muthusaravanan, Advocates for the
petitioner / Accused, and Thiru M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented
for State, upon perusing the petition and having stood over for consideration till
this Court, this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard both side.

The petitioner seeks suspension of sentence pending disposal of appeal.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court
and submitted that the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to a fine to pay
a sum of Rs.500/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one
month for the offence u/s.279 of IPC. Simple imprisonment for a period of one
year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default the petitioner shall undergo SI for a
period of three months for the offence u/s.304(A) of IPC, imposed by the Judicial
Magistrate Court, Sulur in C.C.No.271/2017, dated 15-10-2020. Further
submitted that the fine amount imposed upon the petitioner has been paid by him
and he prayed to suspend the sentence.

The learned Public Prosecutor has not raised any serious objection to allow
the petition.
Considering the fact that the appeal has been preferred without any delay
and the further fact that the fine amount has been paid by the accused and the
sentence has been suspended by the lower Court and that there is no fear of his
running away, this Court is inclined to suspend the sentence of imprisonment alone
till the disposal of the appeal.
Hence the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner
by the lower Court alone is hereby suspended till disposal of the appeal, and the
petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail on him executing a bond for
Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the
Judicial Magistrate Court, Sulur within two weeks from the date of this order and
on condition that the petitioner shall report before the trial Court on the 1 st working
day of every English calendar month at 10.30 a.m. without fail, until further orders.
The appeal is made over to the Vth Additional District & Sessions Court,
Coimbatore. The appeal stands posted to 23-12-2020.
On the failure of the petitioner, to comply with any of the above said
conditions, the suspension granted to them shall stand automatically cancelled and
the Magistrate concerned shall take necessary steps to secure the
petitioner/accused.
This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced
by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Vth Additional District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.

2. The Judicial Magistrate Court, Sulur.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
4. The Petitioner /appellant through his counsel.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru. R.SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3159/2020
(In C.A.No.202/2020)
C.A.No.202/2020 C.C.257/2018

(The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - I, Coimbatore.)

Offences: u/s.138 of NI Act.

(SI for a period of six months, and to pay a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- to the
complainant within two month from the date of judgment, in default to undergo SI
for a period of two months.)
K.Vellachamy Mahendran
… Petitioner / Appellant / Accused
/vs/
1. Vimala,
Priprietrix
M/s. Vimala Packaging
Represented by her Power Agent Mr.Prakash Chand
2. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
… Respondents / Complainant
This petition is filed by the petitioners / appellants, u/s. 389 of Cr.P.C.
praying to suspend the sentence till the disposal of appeal.
This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Thiru.S.Suresh, Advocate for the petitioner / Appellant / Accused,
and Thiru M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State, upon perusing
the petition and having stood over for consideration till this Court, this Court
pronounced the following:-
ORDER

Heard on both side.

 The petitioner seeks suspension of sentence pending disposal of appeal.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court
and submitted that the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to undergo SI
for a period of six months and to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation to
the complainant within two month from the date of judgment, in default the
petitioner shall undergo SI for a period of two months, for the offence u/s.138 of
NI Act, imposed by the Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level-
I, Coimbatore, in C.C.No.257/2018, dated 21-10-2020.

The learned Public Prosecutor has not raised any serious objection to allow
this petition.

The petitioner has not paid compensation amount of Rs.3,00,000/- imposed

upon him.

In the petition, it is stated that the conviction and sentence awarded by the
lower Court is not sustainable and this petitioner is having the valid defence and
prayed to suspend the sentence.

This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. Negotiable
Instruments Act, has been amended vide Act 20/2018 w.e.f. 01-09-2018 and
thereby a new section 148 has been inserted in the parent Act. As per the said
amendment, the Appellate Court may order the appellant to deposit such sum
which shall be a minimum of twenty percent of the fine or compensation awarded
by the trial Court. Recently the Hon’ble Apex Court interpreted the Sec.148 of the
Negotiable Instrument Act in Surinder Singh Deswal @ Col.S.S.Deswal Vs
Virender Gandhi [Criminal Appeal Nos.917-944 of 2019, dated 29-05-2019] that
the Appellate Court shall direct the Appellant / Accused to deposit the sum which
shall not be less than 20% of the fine or compensation, either on an application
filed by the original complainant or even on the application filed by the Appellant /
Accused under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. to suspend the sentence.

After considering all the above said aspects and following the dictum laid
down by the Apex Court, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case
and also considering the nature of offence, this Court is inclined to allow this
petition and the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by
the lower Court alone is hereby suspended till disposal of the appeal subject to the
following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on her executing a bond for
Rs.10,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Judicial
Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level-I, Coimbatore, within 60 days
from the date of this order.

(ii) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards the part of
compensation amount before the lower Court on or before 19-01-2021.

(iii) Final Order in respect of the deposit amount will be passed by the
Appellate Court at the time of disposal of the appeal.

(iv) The petitioner shall report before the trial Court on the 1 st working day of
every English calendar month at 10.30 a.m. without fail, until further orders.

The appeal is made over to the IIIrd Additional District & Sessions Court,
Coimbatore. The appeal stands posted to 23-12-2020.

On the failure of the petitioner, to comply with any of the above said
conditions, the suspension granted to him shall stand cancelled automatically and
the Magistrate concerned shall take necessary steps to secure the petitioner /
accused.

This order is typed, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 19 th

day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.
CC to ( sent via email):

1. The IIIrd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.

2. The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - I,
Coimbatore.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
4. The Petitioner /appellant through his counsel.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru. R.SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3160/2020
(In C.A.No.201/2020)
C.A.No.201/2020 C.C.256/2018

(The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - I, Coimbatore.)

Offences: u/s.138 of NI Act.

(SI for a period of six months, and to pay a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- to the
complainant within two month from the date of judgment, in default to undergo SI
for a period of two months.)
K.Vellachamy Mahendran
… Petitioner / Appellant / Accused
/vs/
1. Vimala,
Priprietrix
M/s. Vimala Packaging
Represented by her Power Agent Mr.Prakash Chand
2. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
… Respondents / Complainant
This petition is filed by the petitioners / appellants, u/s. 389 of Cr.P.C.
praying to suspend the sentence till the disposal of appeal.
This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Thiru.S.Suresh, Advocate for the petitioner / Appellant / Accused,
and Thiru M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State, upon perusing
the petition and having stood over for consideration till this Court, this Court
pronounced the following:-
ORDER

Heard on both side.

 The petitioner seeks suspension of sentence pending disposal of appeal.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court
and submitted that the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to undergo SI
for a period of six months and to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation to
the complainant within two month from the date of judgment, in default the
petitioner shall undergo SI for a period of two months, for the offence u/s.138 of
NI Act, imposed by the Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level-
I, Coimbatore, in C.C.No.256/2018, dated 21-10-2020.

The learned Public Prosecutor has not raised any serious objection to allow
this petition.

The petitioner has not paid compensation amount of Rs.3,00,000/- imposed

upon him.

In the petition, it is stated that the conviction and sentence awarded by the
lower Court is not sustainable and this petitioner is having the valid defence and
prayed to suspend the sentence.

This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. Negotiable
Instruments Act, has been amended vide Act 20/2018 w.e.f. 01-09-2018 and
thereby a new section 148 has been inserted in the parent Act. As per the said
amendment, the Appellate Court may order the appellant to deposit such sum
which shall be a minimum of twenty percent of the fine or compensation awarded
by the trial Court. Recently the Hon’ble Apex Court interpreted the Sec.148 of the
Negotiable Instrument Act in Surinder Singh Deswal @ Col.S.S.Deswal Vs
Virender Gandhi [Criminal Appeal Nos.917-944 of 2019, dated 29-05-2019] that
the Appellate Court shall direct the Appellant / Accused to deposit the sum which
shall not be less than 20% of the fine or compensation, either on an application
filed by the original complainant or even on the application filed by the Appellant /
Accused under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. to suspend the sentence.

After considering all the above said aspects and following the dictum laid
down by the Apex Court, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case
and also considering the nature of offence, this Court is inclined to allow this
petition and the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by
the lower Court alone is hereby suspended till disposal of the appeal subject to the
following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on her executing a bond for
Rs.10,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Judicial
Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level-I, Coimbatore, within 60 days
from the date of this order.

(ii) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards the part of
compensation amount before the lower Court on or before 19-01-2021.

(iii) Final Order in respect of the deposit amount will be passed by the
Appellate Court at the time of disposal of the appeal.

(iv) The petitioner shall report before the trial Court on the 1 st working day of
every English calendar month at 10.30 a.m. without fail, until further orders.

The appeal is made over to the IIIrd Additional District & Sessions Court,
Coimbatore. The appeal stands posted to 23-12-2020.

On the failure of the petitioner, to comply with any of the above said
conditions, the suspension granted to him shall stand cancelled automatically and
the Magistrate concerned shall take necessary steps to secure the petitioner /
accused.

This order is typed, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 19 th

day of November, 2020.
Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.
CC to ( sent via email):

1. The IIIrd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.

2. The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - I,
Coimbatore.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
4. The Petitioner /appellant through his counsel.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru. R.SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3159/2020
(In C.A.No.200/2020)
C.A.No.200/2020 C.C.255/2018

(The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - I, Coimbatore.)

Offences: u/s.138 of NI Act.

(SI for a period of six months, and to pay a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- to the
complainant within two month from the date of judgment, in default to undergo SI
for a period of two months.)
K.Vellachamy Mahendran
… Petitioner / Appellant / Accused
/vs/
1. Vimala,
Priprietrix
M/s. Vimala Packaging
Represented by her Power Agent Mr.Prakash Chand
2. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
… Respondents / Complainant

This petition is filed by the petitioners / appellants, u/s. 389 of Cr.P.C.

praying to suspend the sentence till the disposal of appeal.
This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Thiru.S.Suresh, Advocate for the petitioner / Appellant / Accused,
and Thiru M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State, upon perusing
the petition and having stood over for consideration till this Court, this Court
pronounced the following:-
ORDER
Heard on both side.
 The petitioner seeks suspension of sentence pending disposal of appeal.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court
and submitted that the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to undergo SI
for a period of six months and to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation to
the complainant within two month from the date of judgment, in default the
petitioner shall undergo SI for a period of two months, for the offence u/s.138 of
NI Act, imposed by the Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level-
I, Coimbatore, in C.C.No.255/2018, dated 21-10-2020.

The learned Public Prosecutor has not raised any serious objection to allow
this petition.

The petitioner has not paid compensation amount of Rs.3,00,000/- imposed

upon him.

In the petition, it is stated that the conviction and sentence awarded by the
lower Court is not sustainable and this petitioner is having the valid defence and
prayed to suspend the sentence.

This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. Negotiable
Instruments Act, has been amended vide Act 20/2018 w.e.f. 01-09-2018 and
thereby a new section 148 has been inserted in the parent Act. As per the said
amendment, the Appellate Court may order the appellant to deposit such sum
which shall be a minimum of twenty percent of the fine or compensation awarded
by the trial Court. Recently the Hon’ble Apex Court interpreted the Sec.148 of the
Negotiable Instrument Act in Surinder Singh Deswal @ Col.S.S.Deswal Vs
Virender Gandhi [Criminal Appeal Nos.917-944 of 2019, dated 29-05-2019] that
the Appellate Court shall direct the Appellant / Accused to deposit the sum which
shall not be less than 20% of the fine or compensation, either on an application
filed by the original complainant or even on the application filed by the Appellant /
Accused under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. to suspend the sentence.

After considering all the above said aspects and following the dictum laid
down by the Apex Court, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case
and also considering the nature of offence, this Court is inclined to allow this
petition and the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by
the lower Court alone is hereby suspended till disposal of the appeal subject to the
following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on her executing a bond for
Rs.10,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Judicial
Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level-I, Coimbatore, within 60 days
from the date of this order.

(ii) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards the part of
compensation amount before the lower Court on or before 19-01-2021.

(iii) Final Order in respect of the deposit amount will be passed by the
Appellate Court at the time of disposal of the appeal.

(iv) The petitioner shall report before the trial Court on the 1 st working day of
every English calendar month at 10.30 a.m. without fail, until further orders.

The appeal is made over to the IIIrd Additional District & Sessions Court,
Coimbatore. The appeal stands posted to 23-12-2020.

On the failure of the petitioner, to comply with any of the above said
conditions, the suspension granted to him shall stand cancelled automatically and
the Magistrate concerned shall take necessary steps to secure the petitioner /
accused.

This order is typed, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 19th
day of November, 2020.
Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.
CC to ( sent via email):

1. The IIIrd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.

2. The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - I,
Coimbatore.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
4. The Petitioner /appellant through his counsel.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3156/2020

S.K.Ananthan (Age 48 years)

S/o.Krishnasamy … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
Selvapuram Police Station,
Crime No.Not Known
Offence: u/s.Not Known
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.5, Coimbatore.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release him on anticipatory

bail u/s.438 of Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Thiru. N.Saravana Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner / Accused
and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State, upon
perusing the petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side arguments,
this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court
and submitted that there was some dispute between the petitioner and the defacto
complainant and requested to refer the matter for mediation.
 The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted that
there was some family dispute between the parties. As of now, enquiry is pending.

It appears that some family dispute between the petitioner and the defacto
complainant. Considering the nature of the case, this Court does incline to grant an
order of Not to arrest till 07-12-2020.

Call on 07-12-2020. Till such time, the respondent police is directed not
to arrest the petitioner.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, Selvapuram Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3155/2020

1. A.Abdul Muthalif (Age 39 years)

S/o.P.M.Abdul Kathar

2. Hakkim Mohamed Ismail (Age 44 years)

S/o.Mohamed Ismail

3. B.Navapjan (Age 43 years)

S/o.Mohamed Ismail … Petitioners / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
Kuniyamuthur Police Station,
Crime No.1501/2020
Offence: u/s.323 of IPC and Section 4 of TNWH Act.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.7, Coimbatore.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioners to release them on anticipatory

bail u/s.438 of Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. S.Ma se thung and H.Kaja Husain Advocates for the petitioners
/ Accused and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State,
upon perusing the petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side
arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

 The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.1501/2020 of Kuniyamuthur
Police Station, Coimbatore, since they are apprehending arrest at the hands of the
respondent police for the alleged offences u/s.323 IPC and Sec.4 of TNWH Act,
they have filed this petition, seeking grant of anticipatory bail.

No representation for the petitioners.

The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted that
reply has not been received and requested to adjourn this petition to some other
day.

At request of the learned Public Prosecutor, this petition is adjourned to

25-11-2020.

Call on 25-11-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, Kuniyamuthur Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsel for the Petitioners / Accused persons.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3154/2020

Meganathan (Age 34 years)

S/o.Vellingiri … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
Sulur Police Station,
Crime No.Not Known
Offence: u/s.66 and 67 of Information Technology Act.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court, Sulur.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release him on anticipatory

bail u/s.438 of Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Thiru/Tmt/Selvi. G.Dhanushiya, Advocate for the petitioner /
Accused and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State,
upon perusing the petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side
arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail for the alleged offences u/s.66 and 67
of Information Technology Act.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is present.

 The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted that
no case is registered and no FIR is pending against the petitioner.

The submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor is recorded.

In view of the representation made by the learned Public Prosecutor, as of

now, no case is registered and no FIR is pending against the petitioner. Hence,
there is no apprehension of arrest.

Hence, this petition is dismissed.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, Sulur Police Station, Sulur.
3. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3153/2020

Nagaraj (Aged about 33 years)

S/o. Ramasamy … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
Karamadai Police Station,
Crime No.556/2020
Offence: u/s.452, 394, 397 IPC @ Sec.120(B), 452, 394 r/w 397 of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court, Mettupalayam.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release him on bail u/s.439 of
Cr.P.C.
This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. S.Selvam, R.Dhayalan and Mrs.K.Manonmani, Advocates for
the petitioner / Accused and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor,
represented for State, upon perusing the petition submitted via e-mail and upon
hearing both side arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-
ORDER
Heard on both side.
The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.556/2020 of Karamadai Police
Station, since he is apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for
the alleged offences u/s.452, 394, 397 of IPC @ Sec.452, 394, 397 r/w 120(B) IPC,
he has filed this petition, seeking grant of anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 25-06-2020, at about 8.15 p.m.,

some three persons wrongfully trespassed into the defacto complainant’s house and
robbed 9 ½ sgns of gold jewels from the defacto complainant. Further they
assaulted the defacto complainant by using iron rod and Aruval and also threatened
her with dire consequences.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this
Court and submitted that this petitioner is a daily wages and he did not involved
any activities as alleged. This petitioner is no way connected with the present
offence. This petitioner has been falsely roped in this case. Only on the suspicious
ground, the petitioner has been roped in this case. Further in this case, co-accused
persons were released on bail by this Court. The learned counsel further submitted
that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and
prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted
that the defacto complainant is working as a Teacher. Her husband is doing
agricultural work. Further they are doing renovation work in their old house. On
the date of occurrence, the defacto complainant’s husband went to construction
work. She is alone in her house. At that time, three persons came with deadly
weapons and trespassed into the house and tied her and robbed thirumangala sutra,
bangles and stud from the defacto complainant. Thereafter the present complaint
was lodged by the defacto complainant and based on that the respondent police
registered the case. While so, on 28-08-2020, on receipt of secret information
about the accused, the respondent police was engaged in vehicle checking, at that
time, they found that two persons [Saravanakumar and Arumugam] came in a two
wheeler. The respondent police intercepted them and on enquiry, they did not give
proper answer. Thereafter they were arrested by the respondent police. Further the
respondent police came to know that the said bike was also taken by them in some
other place. Further they changed the number plate of the bike. After arrest, they
gave confession. From the confession, the respondent police came to know about
the involvement of the accused person in the present case and also involvement of
another person namely Ravi. Thereafter the respondent police arrested Manikandan
and Ravi. They gave confession and based on the confession, it came to know that
one Nataraj is the main person and as per his plan, the other accused had
committed the offence. Further in this case, there are six accused in this case.
Except the present petitioner, all are arrested. Further in this case, property has
been recovered and no previous case is reported against the petitioner.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The
respondent police registered the case against the petitioner and others for the
offences u/s.452, 394, 397 of IPC @ Sec.452, 394, 397 r/w 120(B) IPC.
According to the petitioner, he has been falsely implicated in this case and he never
committed any offence as alleged. It appears from the representation made by the
learned Public Prosecutor, in this case, except this petitioner, all other accused
were arrested and released on bail. Further in this case, property has been
recovered from other accused. The petitioner is a first offender.
6. After considering all the above said aspects, considering the nature of
offence, and other circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:-
(i) Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- in the event of his
arrest or the petitioner shall surrender before the Judicial Magistrate,
Mettupalayam, and execute a bond of Rs.10,000/- within 15 days from the
date of this order.

(iii) The petitioner shall produce two sureties likesum each to the value of
Rs.10,000/- to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, Mettupalayam,
within 15 days from the date of this order.

(iv) The petitioner is directed to sign before the respondent police daily
twice i.e., daily at 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., until further orders.

(v) The petitioner or his men shall not tamper the evidence.

(vi) The petitioner shall not abscond and he shall co-operate with the
investigation agency as and when required.

(vii) In case of the condition No.(ii) to (vi) are violated, it is open to the
investigating officer to file appropriate application before the learned Judicial
Magistrate for cancellation of bail granted hereby, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in P.K.Shaji /vs/ State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560].

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.
CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Mettupalayam.

2. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
3. The Inspector of Police, Karamadai Police Station, Coimbatore.
4. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3152/2020

Nagarathinam (Age 22 years)

S/o.Murugan … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
M-1, Periyanaickenpalayam Police Station,
Crime No.1067/2020
Offence: u/s.379 of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.5, Coimbatore.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release him on bail u/s.439 of
Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. L.Rajendran, R.Gokul and M.Murugesh, Advocates for the
petitioner / Accused and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented
for State, upon perusing the petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both
side arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1067/2020 of M-1,

Periyanaickenpalayam Police Station, Coimbatore, for the alleged offences u/s.379
of IPC, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 30-10-2020 at about 8.00 a.m., the
defacto complainant’s worker went to Idikarai and while he was returning, two
persons came in a motor cycle and asked some address. Thereafter the defacto
complainant’s worker reached his home and found that his mobile phone was
missing. Hence, the present complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this
Court and submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely
implicated in this case and he never committed any offence as alleged and he is in
judicial custody from 30-10-2020 and prayed to release the petitioner on bail.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted
that occurrence happened on 29-10-2020 and the same was reported to the
respondent police on 31-10-2020. On 29-10-2020, defacto complainant’s worker
went to Idikarai and while he was returning, two persons came in a motor cycle
and asked some address. Thereafter the defacto complainant’s worker reached his
home and found that his mobile phone was missing. At the time of occurrence, the
accused persons had taken the mobile phone. The defacto complainant’s worker
did not notice the same. The defacto complainant’s worker noticed the number of
the vehicle in which the accused persons came. In this case, investigation is not
yet completed, property has been recovered and no previous case is reported
against the petitioner.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The
petitioner has been remanded to judicial custody for the alleged offence u/s.379
IPC. The petitioner is in judicial custody from 30-10-2020. According to the
petitioner, he has been falsely implicated in this case and he never committed any
offence as alleged. It appears from the representation made by the learned Public
Prosecutor, in this case, during the time of occurrence, the accused persons had
taken the mobile phone from the defacto complainant’s worker. The defacto
complainant’s worker did not notice the same and he noticed the number of the
vehicle in which the accused persons came. In this case, investigation is not yet
completed, property has been recovered and no previous case is reported against
the petitioner.

6. After considering all the above said aspects, considering the nature of
offence, period of detention, since property has been recovered and being the first
offender, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the
following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on his executing a bond for
Rs.10,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Judicial
Magistrate No.5, Coimbatore.

(ii) The petitioner is directed to file surety document before the Court
concerned in advance and thereafter the learned Magistrate shall allot time to
verify the sureties.

(iii) The petitioner is directed to sign before the respondent police, daily at
10.00 a.m. until further orders.

(iv) The petitioner or his men shall not tamper the evidence.

(v) The petitioner shall not abscond and he shall co-operate with the
investigation agency as and when required.

(vi) Violation of any of the condition imposed by this Court will result in
cancellation of the bail.

(vii) In case of the condition No.(i) to (v) are violated, it is open to the
investigating officer to file appropriate application before the learned Judicial
Magistrate for cancellation of bail granted hereby, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in P.K.Shaji /vs/ State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560].

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.5, Coimbatore.

2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
4. The Inspector of Police, M-1, Periyanaickenpalayam Police Station,
Coimbatore.
5. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3151/2020

Karthikeyan (Age 20 years)

S/o.Senivasan … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
Periyanayakampalayam Police Station,
Crime No.1068/2020
Offence: u/s.379 of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.5, Coimbatore.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release him on bail u/s.439 of
Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. R.Hari Prasath and R.Mohamed Yakoob, Advocates for the
petitioner / Accused and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented
for State, upon perusing the petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both
side arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1068/2020 of

Periyanayakampalayam Police Station, Coimbatore, for the alleged offences
u/s.379 of IPC, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 30-10-2020 at about 8.00 a.m., the
defacto complainant went to Periyanaickenpalayam and he was returning in his
motor cycle, two persons came in a motor cycle and asked some address.
Thereafter the defacto complainant reached his home and found that his mobile
phone was missing. Hence, the present complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this
Court and submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely
implicated in this case and he never committed any offence as alleged and he is in
judicial custody from 31-10-2020 and prayed to release the petitioner on bail.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted
that occurrence happened on 30-10-2020 and the same was reported to the
respondent police on 31-10-2020. On 30-10-2020 at about 8.00 a.m., the defacto
complainant went to Periyanaickenpalayam and he was returning in his motor
cycle, two persons came in a motor cycle and asked some address. Thereafter the
defacto complainant reached his home and found that his mobile phone was
missing. At the time of occurrence, the accused persons had taken the mobile
phone. The defacto complainant did not notice the same. The defacto complainant
noticed the number of the vehicle in which the accused persons came. In this case,
investigation is not yet completed, property has been recovered and no previous
case is reported against the petitioner.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The
petitioner has been remanded to judicial custody for the alleged offence u/s.379
IPC. The petitioner is in judicial custody from 31-10-2020. According to the
petitioner, he has been falsely implicated in this case and he never committed any
offence as alleged. It appears from the representation made by the learned Public
Prosecutor, in this case, during the time of occurrence, the accused persons had
taken the mobile phone. The defacto complainant did not notice the same. The
defacto complainant noticed the number of the vehicle in which the accused
persons came. In this case, investigation is not yet completed, property has been
recovered and no previous case is reported against the petitioner.

6. After considering all the above said aspects, considering the nature of
offence, period of detention, since property has been recovered and being the first
offender, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the
following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on his executing a bond for
Rs.10,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Judicial
Magistrate No.5, Coimbatore.
(ii) The petitioner is directed to file surety document before the Court
concerned in advance and thereafter the learned Magistrate shall allot time to
verify the sureties.

(iii) The petitioner is directed to sign before the respondent police, daily at
10.00 a.m. until further orders.

(iv) The petitioner or his men shall not tamper the evidence.

(v) The petitioner shall not abscond and he shall co-operate with the
investigation agency as and when required.

(vi) Violation of any of the condition imposed by this Court will result in
cancellation of the bail.

(vii) In case of the condition No.(i) to (v) are violated, it is open to the
investigating officer to file appropriate application before the learned Judicial
Magistrate for cancellation of bail granted hereby, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in P.K.Shaji /vs/ State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560].

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.5, Coimbatore.

2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
4. The Inspector of Police, Periyanayakampalayam Police Station, Coimbatore.
5. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3149/2020 and 3150/2020

Kannan (Age 51 years) (A-1)
S/o.Muthusamy … Petitioner in CMP.No.3149/2020 /
Accused No.1
1. Naveenkumar (Age 27 years) (A-2)
S/o.Rajendran
2. Johnson (Age 25 years) (A-3)
S/o.Mariya Louis ... Petitioners in CMP.No.3150/2020/
Accused No.2 and 3
/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
Pollachi Town East Police Station,
Crime No.1396/2020
Offence: u/s.341, 342, 363, 294(b) and 506(ii) of IPC @ 147, 148, 341, 342
364(a), 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(ii) of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Pollachi.)

These two petitions filed on behalf of the petitioners in the respective

petitions to release them on bail u/s.439 of Cr.P.C.

These two petitons are coming on this day for final hearing before this Court
in the presence of Tmt. J.Vanita Rosy, Advocate for the petitioners in the
respective petitions, and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for
State, upon perusing the petitions submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side
arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-

COMMON ORDER

Heard on both side.

 The petitioners in the respective petitions are the accused in Crime
No.1396/2020 of Pollachi Town East Police Station, Pollachi, for the alleged
offences u/s.341, 342, 363, 294(b) and 506(ii) of IPC @ 147, 148, 341, 364(a),
294(b), 323, 324 and 506(ii) of IPC, they have filed these two petitions separately,
seeking grant of bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons kidnapped the
defacto complainant and demanded huge amount from the defacto complainant.
Further they assaulted the defacto complainant and threatened him with dire
consequences.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in the respective

petitions appeared before this Court and submitted that in this case, it is alleged
that the accused persons kidnapped the defacto complainant in a car and this
petitioner followed the said car in a scooty. Therefore the defacto complainant was
confined by them in a room. At that time, the defacto complainant heard a noise
which is familiar to him and thereafter he identified the said voice and it was the 1 st
accused. The learned counsel further submitted that the defacto complainant
belongs to the ruling party and previously, he posed himself as an Advocate and
threatened one Sakthivel for which the case was registered for cheating by
impersonation in Azhiyar Police Station in Crime No.34/2013. The learned
counsel further submitted that in this case, the defacto complainant has drafted the
complaint in his own convenience. There is no mentioning in the FIR about the
quantum of amount that was demanded by the accused persons. The material part
of investigation ought to have been completed. The respondent police recovered
weapons and towel. In this case, no offence has been happened, only attempt in
this case. Further in this case, the defacto complainant was treated as out-patient.
The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioners in the respective petitions
are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case, they have been
falsely implicated in this case, and they are in judicial custody from 15-10-2020
and prayed to release the petitioners in the respective petitions on bail.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted
that occurrence happened on 13-10-2020 and the same was reported to the
respondent police on 14-10-2020. On the date of occurrence, at about 12.40 hours,
the defacto complainant was on the way to his house in his two wheeler. When he
was crossing the Sub-way, one car came and stopped in front of the defacto
complainant’s vehicle. Thereafter one Kannan, Naveen Kumar and two other
persons got down from the car and they forcibly pushed the defacto complainant
into the car. Thereafter they confined the defacto complainant in a room. Further
the accused persons assaulted the defacto complainant. They demanded Rs.1.0
crore from the defacto complainant. But the defacto complainant replied that he is
not having huge amount. Thereafter they again took the defacto complainant in the
said car and stopped the car in a particular place and fled away from that place,
after leaving the car along with the defacto complainant. Thereafter the defacto
complainant made a phone call to his nephew and he admitted the defacto
complainant in the hospital on the said day. The learned Public Prosecutor further
submitted that in this case, property has been recovered. Two accused are yet to be
secured and victim has been discharged from the hospital. Investigation is going
on.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The
respondent police registered the case against the petitioners in the respective
petitions and others for the alleged offences u/s. u/s.341, 342, 363, 294(b), 323,
506(ii) IPC @ Sec.147, 148, 341, 342, 294(b), 323, 324, 364(A) and 506(ii) IPC.
The petitioners in the respective petitions are in judicial custody from 15-10-2020.
According to the petitioners in the respective petitions, there is no mentioning in
the FIR about the quantum of amount that was demanded by the accused persons.
The material part of investigation ought to have been completed. The respondent
police recovered weapons and towel. In this case, no offence has been happened,
only attempt in this case. Further in this case, the defacto complainant was treated
as out-patient. It appears from the representation made by the learned Public
Prosecutor, the accused persons forcibly kidnapped the defacto complainant and
confined him in a room and assaulted him. Further the accused persons demanded
Rs.1.0 crore from the defacto complainant. Further in this case, property has been
recovered. Two accused are yet to be secured and victim has been discharged from
the hospital. Investigation is going on.

6. After considering all the above said aspects, considering the nature of
offence, period of detention, and considering other circumstances of the case, this
Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners in the respective petitions
subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioners in the respective petitions are ordered to be enlarged on bail
on their executing a bond for Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties for a like sum
each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Pollachi.
(ii) The petitioners in the respective petitions are directed to file surety
document before the Court concerned in advance and thereafter the learned
Magistrate shall allot time to verify the sureties.

(iii) The petitioners in the respective petitions are directed to sign before the
respondent police, daily twice i.e., daily at 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., until
further orders.

(iv) The petitioners in the respective petitions or their men shall not tamper the
evidence.

(v) The petitioners in the respective petitions shall not abscond and they shall
co-operate with the investigation agency as and when required.

(vi) Violation of any of the condition imposed by this Court will result in
cancellation of the bail.

(vii) In case of the condition No.(i) to (v) are violated, it is open to the
investigating officer to file appropriate application before the learned Judicial
Magistrate for cancellation of bail granted hereby, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in P.K.Shaji /vs/ State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560].

This common order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and

pronounced by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Pollachi.

2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
4. The Inspector of Police, Pollachi Town East Police Station, Pollachi.
5. Counsel for the petitioners in the respective petitions / Accused persons.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3148/2020

S.Raghavendran (Age 19 years)

S/o.Senthilkumar … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
E-2, Peelamedu (L & O) Police Station,
Crime No.2100/2020
Offence: u/s.489(C) of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.2, Coimbatore.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release him on bail u/s.439 of
Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Thiru. S.Gopalakrishnan, Advocate for the petitioner / Accused and
Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State, upon perusing the
petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side arguments, this Court
pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.2100/2020 of E-2, Peelamedu

Police Station, Coimbatore, for the alleged offences u/s.489(C) of IPC, he has filed
this petition, seeking grant of bail.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court
and requested to adjourn this petition to tomorrow.
 The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted that
reply has not been received and requested to adjourn this petition to some other
day.

At request of the Public Prosecutor, this petition is adjourned to 23-11-

2020.

Call on 23-11-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, E-2, Peelamedu Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3146/2020 and 3147/2020

Praveen Ducklass (Age 25 years)

S/o.Selvaraj … Petitioner in C.M.P.3146/2020 /
Accused No.1

Udhayakumar (Age 21 years)

S/o.Nagendran ... Petitioner in C.M.P.3147/2020 /
Accused No.3

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
D-3, Podhanur Police Station,
Crime No. 1579/2020
Offence: u/s.120(b), 341, 294(b), 307, 506(ii) of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court, Madhukkarai.)

These two petitions filed on behalf of the petitioner in the respective

petitions to release them on bail u/s.439 of Cr.P.C.

These two petitions are coming on this day for final hearing before this
Court in the presence of Thiru. S.Rajendran, Advocate for the petitioner in
C.M.P.3146/2020 and Tvl. A.Senthil and A.Sudhakar, Advocates for the
petitioner in C.M.P.3147/2020, and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor,
represented for State, upon perusing the petitions submitted via e-mail and upon
hearing both side arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-

COMMON ORDER

Heard on both side.

 The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.1579/2020 of D-3, Podhanur
Police Station, Coimbatore, for the alleged offences u/s.120(b), 341, 294(b), 307,
506(ii) of IPC., they have filed these two this petitions separately, seeking grant of
bail.

No representation for the petitioner in C.M.P.3147/2020.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in C.M.P.3146/2020

appeared before this Court and submitted his arguments.

The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and requested to
adjourn the petitions to some other day.

At request of the Public Prosecutor, this Court does incline to adjourn

the petitions to 23-11-2020.

Call on 23-11-2020.

This common order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and

pronounced by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, D-3, Podhanur Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsels for the Petitioner in the respective petitions / Accused persons.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3145/2020

Aswin (Age 26 years)

S/o.Udhayakumar … Petitioner / Accused No.2

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
C-4, Rathinapuri Police Station,
Crime No.949/2020
Offence: u/s.147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324, 307 and 506(ii) of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.2, Coimbatore.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release him on bail u/s.439 of
Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Thiru. S.Rajendran, Advocate for the petitioner / Accused No.2 and
Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State, upon perusing the
petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side arguments, this Court
pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.949/2020 of C4, Rathinapuri

Police Station, Coimbatore, for the alleged offences u/s.147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324,
307 and 506(ii) of IPC., he has filed this petition, seeking grant of bail.
 2. The case of the prosecution is that on the date of occurrence, the petitioner
and other accused joined together and picked up quarrel with the defacto
complainant and abused the defacto complainant by using filthy language and
assaulted him by using Aruval and knife and caused grievous injuries to the
defacto complainant and also threatened the defacto complainant with dire
consequences.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this
Court and submitted that in this case, co-accused were released on bail by the
Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Crl.O.P.16644/2020, 16796/2020, dated 04-11-
2020. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is no way
connected with the offence and he belongs to poor family and he is the sole bread
winner of his family. The defacto complainant and the petitioner are friends.
Further in this case, victims have been discharged from the hospital. The petitioner
is in judicial custody from 03-09-2020 and prayed to release the petitioner on bail.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted
that in this case, occurrence taken place on 02-09-2020 and the same was reported
to the respondent police on 03-09-2020. There are seven accused in this case.
Three accused are yet to be secured. In this case, two persons have been sustained
injuries due to the assault made by the accused persons. The learned Public
Prosecutor further submitted that on receipt of intimation from Coimbatore
Medical College Hospital, the respondent police had gone to the hospital and
recorded the statement of the 1st victim and thereafter registered the case.
According to the statement of the 1st victim, he has completed diploma and stopped
his studies. For the past three months, he worked with his uncle. Already, the
victim and the accused are having some dispute. On the date of occurrence, the 1 st
victim and his friend [2nd victim] were standing in front of one temple, the
petitioner and others came there and due to previous vengeance, they started to
pick up quarrel with the victims and abused the victim by using filthy language and
assaulted the victims by using aruval and knife and caused injuries to the 1 st victim
on his head, hand and shoulders and 2nd victim sustained injuries on his head,
shoulder and other parts of his body. Both the victims were admitted in the
hospital on 03-09-2020 and discharged on the same day. Thereafter they admitted
in a private hospital and got treatment and discharged on 07-09-2020. Still the
victim is taking treatment. The learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that
except the present case seven cases in Crime No.598/2013, 420/2014, 312/2016,
39/2018 [C-4 Rathinapuri Police Station], Crime No.720/2018
[Saravanampatti Police Station], Crime No.10/2019 and 1731/2020
[Thudiyalur Police Station] were pending against the petitioner. The petitioner
is a habitual offender. Further in this case, investigation is not yet completed. In
the said circumstances, if the petitioner is released on bail, he may try to threaten
the victim again and also try to commit same type of offence and hence, the
prosecution raised strong objection to the petition.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The
petitioner has been remanded to judicial custody for the offences u/s.147, 148,
294(b), 323, 324, 307 and 506(ii) IPC and the petitioner is in judicial custody from
03-09-2020. According to the petitioner, he never committed any offence and he
has been falsely implicated in this case. Co-accused were released on bail by the
Hon’ble High Court of Madras. Per contra, it appears from the representation made
by the learned Public Prosecutor, in this case, due to the assault made by the
accused persons by using Aruval and knife, two persons sustained grievous
injuries. Further except the present case, seven cases are pending against the
petitioner in various police stations.

6. After considering all the above said aspects, considering the nature of
offence, manner of offence said to have been committed by the petitioner, and
considering previous antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to
grant bail to the petitioner.

Hence, this petition is dismissed.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, C-4, Rathinapuri Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3144/2020

S.Gopal (Age 24 years)

S/o.Shanmugam … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
D2, Selvapuram Police Station,
Crime No.1955/2020
Offence: u/s.294(b), 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of TNPPDL Act and Section 4
of TNPHW Act, 2002.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.5, Coimbatore.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release him on bail u/s.439 of
Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. S.Duraisamy and P.Krishnaraj, Advocates for the petitioner /
Accused and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State,
upon perusing the petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side
arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1955/2020 of D2, Selvapuram

Police Station, for the alleged offences u/s.294(b), 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of
TNPPDL Act and Section 4 of TNPHW Act, 2002, he has filed this petition,
seeking grant of bail.
 The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is present.

The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and requested to
adjourn this petition to some other day.

At request of the learned Public Prosecutor, this petition is adjourned to

23-11-2020.

Call on 23-11-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, D-2, Selvapuram Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3143/2020

Gowtham (Age 20 years)

S/o.Sampath … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
Annur Police Station,
Crime No.1484/2020
Offence: u/s.174 of Cr.P.C. @ 306 of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court, Mettupalayam.)

The petitioner seeks relaxation of the condition imposed on him in

C.M.P.No.2757/2020, dated 16-10-2020.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. P.G.Vijay and Miss.Aishvarya, Advocates for the petitioner /
Accused and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State,
upon perusing the petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side
arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner seeks relaxation of the condition which is already imposed on

him by this Court in C.M.P.2757/2020, dated 16-10-2020.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner appeared before this Court and
submitted that bail was granted to the petitioner on 16-10-2020, by this Court, in
C.M.P.2757/2020, with a condition to sign before the respondent police daily
twice, until further orders. As per the order passed by this Court, the petitioner has
been complying with the condition from 19-10-2020 without any violation. The
petitioner is a coolie worker and he is the sole bread winner of his family and it is
very difficult to the petitioner to sign before the respondent police and hence, the
petitioner prayed to relax the condition totally.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted
that the petitioner has been complying with the condition. The learned Public
Prosecutor further submitted that the prosecution has no objection to relax the
condition totally.

4. Considering the above said aspects, having regard to the period of

compliance, nature of offence and also considering the prevailing situation, this
Court is inclined to relax the condition totally which is already imposed on the
petitioner. Further the petitioner is directed to appear before the Court concerned
on all the hearing dates without fail.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, Annur Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3142/2020

Elavarasan (Age 19 years)

S/o.Babu … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
Perur Police Station,
Crime No.1093/2020
Offence: u/s.379 of IPC.
Through the Special Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Coimbatore.)

The petitioner seeks relaxation of the condition imposed on him in

C.M.P.No.2705/2020, dated 01-10-2020.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. M.Vetri and S.Gopalakrishnan, Advocates for the petitioner /
Accused and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State,
upon perusing the petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side
arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner seeks relaxation of the condition which is already imposed on

him by this Court in C.M.P.2705/2020, dated 01-10-2020.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner appeared before this Court and
submitted that bail was granted to the petitioner on 01-10-2020, by this Court, in
C.M.P.2705/2020, with a condition to sign before the respondent police daily at
10.00 a.m., until further orders. As per the order passed by this Court, the
petitioner has been complying with the condition for the past 35 days without any
violation. The petitioner is the sole bread winner of his family and he is the daily
wages worker. The petitioner’s native place is Vaniyampadi, Vellur District. In
the said circumstances, it is very difficult to the petitioner to come here and sign
before the respondent police and hence, the petitioner prayed to relax the condition
totally.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted
that the petitioner has been complying with the condition. The learned Public
Prosecutor further submitted that the prosecution has no objection to relax the
condition totally.

4. Considering the above said aspects, having regard to the period of

compliance, nature of offence and also considering the prevailing situation, this
Court is inclined to relax the condition totally which is already imposed on the
petitioner. Further the petitioner is directed to appear before the Court concerned
on all the hearing dates without fail.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, Perur Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3141/2020

Manoj.R
S/o.Rangasamy … Petitioner / Accused No.2

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
CCB Police Station,
Crime No.21/2020
Offence: u/s.294(b), 406 and 420 of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.7, Coimbatore.)

The petitioner seeks relaxation of the condition imposed on him in

C.M.P.No.2580/2020, dated 24-09-2020.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Thiru. R.Sivakumar, Advocate for the petitioner / Accused No.2 and
Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State, upon perusing the
petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side arguments, this Court
pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner seeks relaxation of the condition which is already imposed on

him by this Court in C.M.P.2580/2020, dated 24-09-2020.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner appeared before this Court and
submitted that bail was granted to the petitioner on 24-09-2020, by this Court, in
C.M.P.2580/2020, with a condition to sign before the respondent police daily
twice, until further orders. As per the order passed by this Court, the petitioner has
been complying with the condition for the past 30 days without any violation.
Now the petitioner prayed to relax the condition totally.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted
that the petitioner has been complying with the condition. The learned Public
Prosecutor further submitted that the prosecution has no objection to relax the
condition totally.

4. Considering the above said aspects, having regard to the period of

compliance, nature of offence and also considering the prevailing situation, this
Court is inclined to relax the condition totally which is already imposed on the
petitioner. Further the petitioner is directed to appear before the Court concerned
on all the hearing dates without fail.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, CCB Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3140/2020

1. S.Chandrasekar (Age 53 years)

S/o.Someswara

2. Ms.Smrithi (Age 25 years)

D/o.S.Chandrasekar … Petitioners / Accused Nos.1 and 2

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
Annur Police Station
Crime No.1480/2020
Offence: u/s.447, 427, 506(1) of IPC
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court, Mettupalayam.)

The petitioners seek relaxation of the condition imposed on them in

C.M.P.No.2776/2020, dated 09-10-2020.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. S.Vivekanandan, K.C.M.Karthi and A.Ananda Babu,
Advocates for the petitioners / Accused No.1 and 2 and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj,
Public Prosecutor, represented for State, upon perusing the petition submitted via
e-mail and upon hearing both side arguments, this Court pronounced the
following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioners seek relaxation of the condition which is already imposed on

them by this Court in C.M.P.2776/2020, dated 09-10-2020.
 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners appeared before this
Court and submitted that anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioners on 16-09-
2020, by this Court, in C.M.P.2776/2020, with a condition to sign before the
respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., until further orders. As per the order passed
by this Court, the petitioners produced sureties before the Judicial Magistrate,
Mettupalayam on 23-10-2020. Further the petitioners have been complying with
the condition from 24-10-2020 without any violation. Now the petitioners prayed
to relax the condition totally.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted
that the petitioners have been complying with the condition. The learned Public
Prosecutor further submitted that the prosecution has no objection to relax the
condition totally.

4. Considering the above said aspects, having regard to the period of

compliance, nature of offence and also considering the prevailing situation, this
Court is inclined to relax the condition totally which is already imposed on the
petitioners. Further the petitioners are directed to appear before the Court
concerned on all the hearing dates without fail.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, Annur Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsel for the Petitioners / Accused persons.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3105/2020

1. Senthilkumar (Age 50 years)

S/o.Late.Natarajan

2. Ranjithkumar (Age 22 years)

S/o.T.Velusamy … Petitioners / Accused

/vs/
State, Rep. by
through the Inspector of Police,
Negamam Police Station,
Crime No.1154/2020
Offence: u/s.294(b), 452, 324 and 506(ii) of IPC
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Pollachi.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioners to release them on anticipatory

bail u/s.438 of Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Mrs. S.Sumathy and N.Priyadharshini, Advocates for the petitioners
/ Accused and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State,
upon perusing the petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side
arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.1154/2020 of Negamam Police

Station, since they are apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police,
for the alleged offences u/s.294(b), 452, 324 and 506(ii) of IPC, they have filed
this petition, seeking grant of anticipatory bail.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners appeared before this Court
and submitted arguments.

The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted his
arguments. Further the learned Public Prosecutor requested to adjourn the petition
to some other day.

At request of the learned Public Prosecutor, this petition is adjourned to

23-11-2020.

Call on 23-11-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, Negamam Police Station, Pollachi.
3. Counsel for the Petitioners / Accused persons.
C.M.P.3076/2020 [Intervening Petition No.2499/2020]

Dated:19-11-2020.

In view of the order passed in C.M.P.2499/2020, this petition is closed.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.7, Coimbatore.

2. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
3. The Inspector of Police, CCB, Police Station, Coimbatore.
4. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
5. Counsel for the defacto complainant / intervener.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3042/2020

1. Vishnu (Age 30 years) (A-2)

S/o.Viju

2. Vijay Antony Johnson (Age 22 years) (A-3)

S/o.Johnson … Petitioners / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
Saibaba Colony Police Station,
Crime No.1068/2020
Offence: u/s.341 and 307 of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant

(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.7, Coimbatore.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioners to release them on bail u/s.439
of Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. C.Subramanian, M.Arumugam and G.Tamilselvi, Advocates
for the petitioner / Accused and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor,
represented for State, upon perusing the petition submitted via e-mail and also
hearing both side arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

 The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.1068/2020 of Saibaba Colony
Police Station, for the alleged offence u/s.341 and 307 IPC, they have filed this
petition, seeking grant of bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners and yet another person
confined the defacto complainant and assaulted him by using Aruval and caused
grievous injuries to the defacto complainant.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this
Court and submitted that the 2nd petitioner is not present in the place of occurrence
at the time of occurrence. There is no specific allegation against him. The learned
counsel further submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have been
falsely implicated in this case. They have not committed any offence as alleged.
The petitioners are in judicial custody from 13-09-2020 and 12-10-2020 and
prayed to release them on bail.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and raised
objection to grant bail to the petitioner. The learned Public Prosecutor further
submitted that occurrence happened on 12-09-2020 and the same was reported to
the respondent police on the same day. There are two accused in this case. On
receipt of information from One Care Medical Centre, Coimbatore, the respondent
police had gone to the hospital and recorded the statement and registered the case.
The defacto complainant is working in SS Ads Company. Before two and half
months, there was some dispute between one Anand and the defacto complainant.
One Vijay Antony [2nd petitioner herein] is the friend of Anand. While so, on
03-07-2020, at about 11.00 p.m., the said Anand and the 2nd petitioner approached
the defacto complainant for compromise. At that time, there was some wordy
quarrel between them. In that process, Anand and the 2nd petitioner tried to assault
the defacto complainant. On seeing this, the defacto complainant’s father, mother
and two others assaulted the 2nd petitioner. The 2nd petitioner preferred complaint
in this regard and a case has been registered against the defacto complainant’s
father, mother and two others. The defacto complainant and others were arrested
and remanded and thereafter they released on bail. But the said Anand and the
petitoner had got vengeance against the defacto complainant. While so, on the date
of occurrence, the defacto complainant and his friend Ganesh were travelling near
KMCH Hospital, the accused persons [Vishnu (1st petitioner) and Ragul] came
in two motor cycle and followed the defacto complainant. On seeing the defacto
complainant, they informed the same to the 2nd petitioner. But the 2nd petitioner
informed them that he is away from that place and directed them to do the defacto
complainant. When the defacto complainant was nearing the place of occurrence,
the accused persons intercepted the defacto complainant and picked up quarrel
with the defacto complainant and asked the defacto complainant to come along
with them. The defacto complainant refused to go along with them and tried to
escape from that place. The accused persons chased the defacto complainant and
the accused Vishnu [1st petitioner] pulled the defacto complainant down and
Raghul assaulted the defacto complainant by using Aruval and caused grievous
injuries to the defacto complainant. Due to the said incident, the defacto
complainant’s father along with 15 persons assaulted one Biju, who is the friend of
the accused persons and murdered him. As a result of which, a case is registered
by Kattoor Police Station, against the defacto complainant’s father and others. The
learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that in this case, after the occurrence,
the defacto complainant was admitted in the Government Hospital on 12-09-2020
and discharged on the same day and thereafter he was admitted in a private
hospital and got treatment for a period of two days. The learned Public Prosecutor
further submitted that in this case, the petitioners and yet another accused Ragul
jointly committed the offence and the alleged occurrence happened due to the
group clash between two groups. In this case, investigation is not yet completed. In
the said circumstances, if the petitioners are released on bail, there is every chance
for arising law and order problem and hence, the learned Public Prosecutor prayed
to dismiss the petition.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The
petitioners have been remanded to judicial custody for the offence u/s.341 and 307
IPC. The petitioners are in judicial custody from 13-09-2020 and 12-10-2020.
According to the petitioners, they have been falsely implicated in this case. They
have not committed any offence as alleged. It appears from the representation
made by the learned Public Prosecutor, in this case, the petitioners and yet another
accused Ragul jointly committed the offence and the alleged occurrence happened
due to the group clash between two groups. Investigation is not yet completed.

6. After considering all the above said aspects, considering the nature of
offence, manner of offence said to have been committed by the accused persons,
nature of weapon used, this Court is of the considered view that the apprehension
raised by the Prosecution that if the petitioners are released on bail, there is every
possibility to create law and order problem, is a acceptable one. Hence, this Court
is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.
 Hence, this petition is dismissed.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, Saibaba Colony Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsel for the Petitioners / Accused persons.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.2499/2020

Anees (Age 36 years)

S/o.Ambi … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/

State, Rep. by
through the Inspector of Police,
CCB, Police Station,
Crime No. 22/2020.
Offence: u/s. 406 and 420 of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No. 7, Coimbatore.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release him on bail u/s.439 of
Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. V.C.Ajieethkumar, T.Sivakumar, S.Kokila, V.Prasath,
B.Sumithra and K.Ramkumar, Advocates for the petitioner / Accused and Tvl.
C.Kannan, R.Dinesh Kumar, P.Muthu Kumar, T.Jeyabasker and
R.Subathra, Advocates for the defacto complainant / intervener
[C.M.P.3076/2020] and Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for
State, upon perusing the petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side
arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-
ORDER
Heard on both side.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.22/2020 of CCB, Police Station,

for the alleged offences u/s.406 and 420 IPC, he has filed this petition, seeking
grant of bail.
 No representation for the petitioner. Petitioner called absent.

No representation for the defacto complainant / intervener.

The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted that
the petitioner is in custody for three days only and thereafter, since he was affected
by Covid-19, he was released on interim bail. The learned Public Prosecutor
further submitted that after coming out on interim bail, in order to serve the notice
to the petitioner, the Special Sub-Inspector had gone to the residence of the
petitioner and came to know that the petitioner is not residing in the address.
Further as ordered by this Court, as of now, the petitioner has not produced sureties
before the Judicial Magistrate No.7, Coimbatore. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the
interim bail already granted to the petitioner.

This Court called for report from the learned Judicial Magistrate No.7,
Coimbatore, with regard to the aspect, “Whether the petitioner has produced
sureties or not?” The learned Judicial Magistrate No.7, Coimbatore sent
report dated 08-11-2020 stating that the petitioner did not produce surety as
ordered by this Court in C.M.P.2499/2020, dated 05-10-2020.

In view of the facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to

extend the interim bail granted to the petitioner.

This petition is dismissed.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.
CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.7, Coimbatore.

2. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
3. The Inspector of Police, CCB, Police Station, Coimbatore.
4. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
5. Counsel for the defacto complainant / intervener.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.2914/2020

Syed Abuthair (Age 23 years)

S/o.Sahul Hameed … Petitioner / Accused No.2

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
City Crime Branch Police Station,
Crime No.12/2020
Offence: u/s.120(B), 406, 420 and 506(i) of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.7, Coimbatore.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release him on anticipatory

bail u/s.438 of Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Tvl. Abiboor Rahman and A.Mohamed Sulaiman, Advocates for
the petitioner / Accused No.2 and Thiru. M.Saravanakumar, R.Meenakshi and
Maheskumar, Advocates for the defacto complainant / intervener, and
Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State, upon perusing the
petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side arguments, this Court
pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.12/2020 of City Crime Branch,

Coimbatore, since he is apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police
for the alleged offences u/s.120(B), 406, 420 and 506(i) IPC, he has filed this
petition, seeking grant of anticipatory bail.
 The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court
and requested to adjourn this petition to some other day.

The learned Public Prosecutor is present. The petitioner’s counsel is not

ready.

At request of the petitioner’s counsel, this petition is adjourned to

25-11-2020.

Call on 25-11-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
4. Counsel for the defacto complainant / intervener.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.2975/2020

N.A.Murugesan
S/o.Late.Nachimuthu Gr, … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
E-2, Peelamedu Police Station,
Crime No.Not Known
Offence: u/s. 420 of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court No.2, Coimbatore)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release him on anticipatory

bail u/s.438 of Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Thiru. K.Baladendapani, Advocate for the petitioner / Accused and
Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State, upon perusing the
petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side arguments, this Court
pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail u/s.438 of Cr.P.C., for the alleged
offence u/s.420 of IPC.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is present.

 The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted that
no case is registered and no FIR is pending against the petitioner.

The submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor is recorded.

In view of the representation made by the learned Public Prosecutor, as of

now, no case is registered and no FIR is pending against the petitioner. Hence,
there is no apprehension of arrest.

Hence, this petition is dismissed.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 19th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. The Inspector of Police, E-2, Peelamedu Police Station, Coimbatore.
3. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L.,

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Thursday, this the 19th day of November, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3016/2020

Vignesh @ Vigneshwaran (Age 26 years)

S/o.Pounraj … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/
State,
through the Inspector of Police,
Madukkarai Police Station,
Crime No.1764/2020
Offence: u/s.294(b), 324 and 506(ii) of IPC @ Sec.302 of IPC.
Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant
(The Judicial Magistrate Court, Madukkarai.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release him on bail u/s.439 of
Cr.P.C.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the
presence of Thiru. S.Rajendran, Advocate for the petitioner / Accused and
Thiru. M.Kanagaraj, Public Prosecutor, represented for State, upon perusing the
petition submitted via e-mail and upon hearing both side arguments, this Court
pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1764/2020 of Madukkarai Police

Station, for the alleged offences u/s.294(b), 324, 506(ii) of IPC @ Sec.302 of IPC,
he has filed this petition, seeking grant of bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the wife of
the deceased. The petitioner is the son-in-law of the defacto complainant. On the
date of occurrence, the petitioner came in a drunken mood and picked up quarrel
with the deceased and assaulted him and kicked him. Due to which, the deceased
dashed against the wall and sustained injury.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this
Court and submitted that all are family members and they had some dispute. The
learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been
falsely implicated in this case and he is in judicial custody for the past 71 days and
prayed to release the petitioner on bail.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted
that occurrence happened on 21-08-2020 and the same was reported to the
respondent police on 24-08-2020. The defacto complainant is the wife of the
deceased. The petitioner is the son-in-law of the defacto complainant. The
deceased and the petitioner jointly used to go to some work. On the date of
occurrence, the petitioner came in a drunken mood and demanded money and
picked up quarrel with the deceased. There arose some wordy quarrel between
them. In that process, the petitioner assaulted the deceased and kicked him. Due
to which, the deceased dashed against the wall and sustained injury. Immediately,
they admitted him in the hospital on 22-08-2020 and on 24-08-2020, the deceased
died in the hospital. The learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that in this
case, investigation is almost completed and the witnesses are family members.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The
petitioner has been remanded to judicial custody for the offences u/s.294(b), 324
and 506(ii) IPC @ Sec.302 IPC and he is in judicial custody for the past 50 days.
Admittedly, the defacto complainant is the wife of the deceased. The petitioner is
the son-in-law of the defacto complainant. According to the petitioner, he has been
falsely implicated in this case and he never committed any offence as alleged. Per
contra, it appears from the representation made by the learned Public Prosecutor,
on the date of occurrence, the petitioner assaulted the deceased and kicked him and
due to which, he dashed against the wall and sustained injury. Further in this case,
investigation is not yet completed and the witnesses are family members.

6. After considering all the above said aspects, considering the nature of
offence, considering the period of detention, and other circumstances of the case,
this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following
conditions:-
(i) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on his executing a bond for
Rs.10,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Judicial
Magistrate, Madukkarai.

(ii) The petitioner is directed to file surety document before the Court
concerned in advance and thereafter the learned Magistrate shall allot time to
verify the sureties.

(iii) The petitioner is directed to sign before the respondent police, daily at
10.00 a.m. until further orders.

(iv) The petitioner shall not enter into the defacto complainant’s residence.

(v) The petitioner or his men shall not tamper the evidence.

(vi) The petitioner shall not abscond and he shall co-operate with the
investigation agency as and when required.

(vii) Violation of any of the condition imposed by this Court will result in
cancellation of the bail.

(viii) In case of the condition No.(i) to (vi) are violated, it is open to the
investigating officer to file appropriate application before the learned Judicial
Magistrate for cancellation of bail granted hereby, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in P.K.Shaji /vs/ State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560].

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me via email on this 10th day of November, 2020.

Sd/- R. SAKTHIVEL.,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
COIMBATORE.

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Madukkarai.

2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.
3. Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.
4. The Inspector of Police, Madukkarai Police Station, Coimbatore.
5. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused.
 IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V, COIMBATORE
Presence :A.PRABU ,M.L., PGD IPL.,
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-I
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V(FAC)
COIMBATORE.
Thursday, 19th day of November 2020
C.M.P. No.3892 Of 2020
CR.NO.38 OF 2018

N.Rajkamal
S/o.Nagarajan –---- Petitioner /Third Party
/vs/

The Inspector of Police,

R6 Karunya P.S
Cr.No. 38/2018
Coimbatore . –---Respondent / Complainant
U/S.379 IPC

ORDER

In view of the endorsement by the petitioner counsel as not press, this petition is
dismissed as not pressed.

/sd/A.Prabu

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V(FAC)

COIMBATORE