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

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, 2nd day of December 2020 C.M.P. No. 4170 Of 2020 CR.NO.1089 OF 2020 M. Prabu S/o.C.Manisamy .. Petitioner/ Accused / Vs/ Inspector of Police, B3 V.H.Road PS, Coimbatore Cr. No.1089 of 2020 ... Respondent/ Complainant

CONDITION RELAXATION ORDER Condition Relaxation Application Filed on behalf of the petitioner by Advocate Thiru.S.Kumaresan, B.A.,B.L., and this application has been received through E-mail. Police submitted reply on 02-12-2020. 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 r/w 7(3) TNLR ACT and he was arrested by the respondent/police and he was remanded to judicial custody on 24.10.2020.

3. Notice was sent through email to police. In the reply submitted by police on 2nd December, police stated that the petitioner was signed before the respondent police station on 06.11.2020 to 02.12.20 (Total 26 days).

4. In this petition the petitioner submits that the Petitioner/Accused is complying the condition from 06.11.20 regularly without fail. He is the sole breadwinner of this family. He could not able to attend his regular work therefore the petitioner's family is struggling for their day to day expenses and needs. He will not abscond or tamper with any of the witnesses.

5. On perusal of case records it is seen that the order has been passed directing to the petitioner sign before the respondent police at 10.00 a.m until further orders. On perusal of case records it is seen that accused has comply the condition from 06.11.2020 to 02.12.20 (26 days). Hence, on considering the facts and circumstances of this case and also considering the police reply, this court is inclined to grant modify the condition and the petitioner/accused should appear before respondent police and sign weekly once on every Monday at 10 a.m. for 4 weeks after sign the condition fully relaxed.

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 2nd day of December 2020.

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

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. 4428/2020 in Cr. No. 1956/2020 Wednesday the 02nd day of December 2020 Saravanan, S/o.Bala .. Petitioner/Accused / VERSUS /

Inspector of Police, D-1 Ramanathapuram (Crime) Ps., Cr.No: 1956/2020 U/s : 379 IPC .. Respondent/Complainant. ORDER

The bail application in CMP.No.4428/2020 received by this court through e- mail. The respondent/police submitted their reply through e-mail on 02.12.2020.

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 08.11.2020. For the past 25 days the petitioner is in Judicial custody. The case of the prosecution is when the defacto complainant traveled in a private bus on 08.01.2020 one person snatched a cash of Rs.7850/- in his packet. After investigation the respondent police has arrested this accused based upon his confession made in Cr.No.1957/2020.

In the bail application in it was stated the accused was arrested and remanded to Judicial custody on 08.11.2020. In the bail application it was stated the petitioner was asked to present in the police station for preventing arrest at the time of Deepavali. Then the petitioner went to the police station and he was falsely arrested in two cases. In the bail application it was further stated the petitioner is an innocent person and he is no way connected in this case. The petitioner is in under Judicial custody for the past 23 days. In the bail application it was further stated the accused is a law abiding citizen and he will not abscond. In the petition it was further stated if the bail is granted the petitioner is ready to produce substantial sureties as per orders of this court. The petitioner counsel also submitted the written argument along with the bail application.

In the reply the respondent/police has stated the Investigation is still pending. The petitioner also involved in E-3 Saravanampatti Police station in Cr.No.631/2013 and the case was disposed off. The petitioner is also involved in Cr.No.618/2018. If the bail is granted the petitioner will abscond and he will commit the same kind of offence. On this grounds the respondent police strongly opposed the bail application.

On perusal of the records and as per the reply submitted by the respondent police the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 08.11.2020 for the alleged offence U/s.379 IPC. For the past 25 days the petitioner is in judicial custody. The petitioner was arrested in this case as per the confession statement in Cr.No.1957/2020. As per the reply the respondent police has stated the petitioner was involved in Cr.No.1957/2020 also. Further more the petitioner also involved in 2 other cases. Hence, in this circumstances considering the previous antecedents this court is not inclined to grant bail and the same is hereby dismissed.

The order is typed, corrected and pronounced by me via email on 02nd DECEMBER of 2020. Sd/-K.R.Kannan, Judicial Magistrate No. VI, Coimbatore. IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE METTUPALAYAM Present: Thiru. M.Ramadhas, M.L., District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate(FAC), Mettupalayam Wednesday 02nd day of December 2020 C.M.P.No.1289/2020 in Cr.No 514/2020 (On the file of Inspector of Police, Sirumugai)

1) Mohamed Rafiq, S/o. Abdul Razzak. 2) Vasim Akram S/o. Mubarak Ali …..Petitioner/Accused No.A1 and A2.

State through the -vs- Inspector of Police, Sirumugai Police station, Coimbatore District. …..Respondent/Complainant

This bail application has been received through email. ORDER This petition is filed for bail for the alleged offence u/s.5 r/w 7(3) Lotteries Regulation Act. Since it is non bailable offence, notice was sent to police and reply was also received.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners/accused were alleged to have committed the offence u/s.5 r/w 7(3) Lotteries Regulation Act.

In the reply, the police has stated that if the petitioners/accused are enlarged on bail they will not appear before this court at the time of trial and as such the prosecution has strongly opposed to release the accused on bail.

The learned counsel for the petitioners/accused have stated in the petition that the petitioners / accused are no way connected with the offence, hence they may be enlarged on bail. It is seen from the records that the petitioners/accused were alleged to have committed the offence u/s.5 r/w 7(3) Lotteries Regulation Act. They were remanded to Judicial Custody on 27.11.2020. The accused have been inside the Jail for the past 6 days. Considering the period of incarceration, Considering the fact and circumstances of this case, Considering the COVID-19 pandemic situation, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

Accordingly this petitioners are hereby ordered to be released on bail on the executing a bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with 2 sureties to the like sum each and further condition that they shall appear and sign before the Respondent P.S daily once at 10.00 A.M. until further orders.

/sd/M. Ramadhas.M.L.,(02.12.2020) District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate(FAC), Mettupalayam. IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, COIMBATORE Presence :A.PRABU ,M.L., PGD IPL., JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-I Wednesday, 2nd day of December 2020 C.M.P. No. (urgent ) 4438 Of 2020 CR.NO.1268 OF 2020

Rahim(Abdul rahim)(19) S/o.Mohammed kani Vs .. Petitioner/ Accused

Inspector of Police, R.S.Puram p.s, coimbatore Cr. No.1268 of 2020 ... Respondent/ Complainant

ORDER

Bail Application Filed U/s. 437 OF Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner by Advocate Thiru Zackriya and this application has been received through E-mail. Police submitted reply on 02.12.2020. 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 30.10.2020.

3. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Petitioner Submits that the truth of the fact is that he is a road side merchant and the other accused namely soorya is known to him as a neighbour. On 29.10.2020 the said soorya came to the petitioners house in a two wheeler R.No.TN 39 AC 4360 and left the vehicle stating that iw was his friends vehicle and later took the vehicle and went away. The petitioner came to know that the vehicle was a stolen one and the police arrested the said soorya and the police called the petitioner and another namely nowfal for enquiry on 30.10.2020. the petitioner submits that on 30.10.2020 he was arrested by the rspondent police and the respondent police abtained an extrajudicial confession from the petitioner by way of sweet box method. The petitioner was no way conneced with the offence. On 30.10.2020 the petitioner was remanded before this hon'blw Court and sent to judicial custody. The respondent police stated that they recovered the stolen property. The petitioner is the permanent resident in the above mentioned address the petitioenr is the only breadwinnerof this family. He is also willing to abide by any condition imposed by this Hon'ble Court. On considering the above facts, the petitioner humbly submits he is entitled for an order of bail. Thus he prayed for release on bail.

4. Notice was sent through email to police. In the reply submitted by police on 2 nd December, police and prosecution has raised strong objection in releasing the accused on bail stating that the prosecution submitted that if the petitioner is released on bail he will tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation, he may continue to the same kind of offence, Investigation is still pending. Hence, the prosecution strongly oppose to allow this petition and may be dismissed.

5. Material submitted through email 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.

Dictated to Steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me through Email on this the 2nd day of December 2020.

-Sd-

A.PRABU JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I,COIMBATORE IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, COIMBATORE Presence :A.PRABU ,M.L., PGD IPL., JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-I Wednesday, 2nd day of December 2020 C.M.P. No. (urgent ) 4437 Of 2020 CR.NO.101 OF 2018 CC.No.715/2019

Fairoz Ali syed @ Fairoz(36) S/o.Nazir Ali Shahid Ali(28) S/o.Sarparaj Ashnasri Vs .. Petitioner/ Accused

Inspector of Police, R.S.Puram p.s, coimbatore Cr. No. 101 of 2018 ... Respondent/ Complainant

ORDER

Bail Application Filed U/s. 437 OF Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner by Advocate Thiru Antony Xavier and this application has been received through E-mail. Police submitted reply on 02.12.2020. 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 420, 120(B) IPC and he was arrested by the respondent/police and he was remanded to judicial custody on 27.02.2018.

3. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitoners are not involved in this occurrence, the respondent police have wrongly arrested to these petitioners and put up in this case against these petitioners. The petitioners are very innocent and they seem to be in misunderstanding with each other, as a result in which the defacto complainant has preferred the above complaint given before the respondent police. The petitioners have nothing to do with their dispute and they are mentioned as accused no.3 and 4 in this case. The petitioners humbly submit that they are involved in this occurrence because theses petitioners are remanded in some other case and the respondent police arrested by the PT warrant. The rspondent police has put up not theft any articles as say truth. The petitioners humbly submit that they are getting a bail, the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the further investigation of this case. Already these petitioenrs were few cases in some other court in coimbatore and all the cases were going to trial process. In this case also under going to process about the prosecution witness of complainant side and these petitioners are appearing in every hearing. The petitioners is ready to cooperate with all the further investigation and proceedings of this case and he will be appear in this case for all the hearings. The petitioenrs was not filed any other Judicial Magistrate court or hon'ble Sessions Court. Thus he prayed for release on bail.

4. Notice was sent through email to police. In the reply submitted by police on 2 nd December, police and prosecution has raised strong objection in releasing the accused on bail stating that the prosecution submitted that if the petitioner is released on bail he will tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation, he may continue to the same kind of offence. Hence, the prosecution strongly oppose to allow this petition and may be dismissed.

5. Material submitted through email were perused. This case is numbered as CC 715/2019. This case is in trial stage. 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.

Dictated to Steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me through Email on this the 2nd day of December 2020.

-Sd-

A.PRABU JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I,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. Wednesday, 2nd day of December 2020 C.M.P. No.4426 Of 2020 CR.NO.1115 OF 2020

N.Arun Aged about 40 yrs, A5 S/o.Narayanan. .. 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.J.Senthilkumar, and this application has been received through E-mail. Police submitted reply on 02-12-2020. After considering bail application, 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 03.11.2020.

3. Notice was sent through email to police .In the reply submitted by police on 2nd December, 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 not yet to be arrested 4. The petitioner/accused stated that the petitioner/accused is innocent Government employee and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He have permanent residence at Coimbatore he will not abscond or tamper with any of the witnesses in the event of bail. He will furnish sufficient solvencies before this court. He prepared to abide any of the condition imposed by the court. There is no bail petition is pending before any court of law filed by this petitioner other than this application.

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 2nd December 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 , 2nd day of December 2020 C.M.P. No.4423 Of 2020 CR.NO.166 OF 2016 CC 320/16 K.Bala S/o.Kannaiyan .. Petitioner/ Accused / Vs/ Inspector of Police, B3 V.H.Road PS, Coimbatore Cr. No.166 of 2016 ... Respondent/ Complainant

ORDER Bail Application Filed U/s. 437 OF Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner by Advocate Thiru.M.Nagarajan, and this application has been received through E-mail. Police submitted reply on 02-12-2020. After considering bail application, 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 294(b), 341, 326, 506(ii) IPC and he was arrested by the respondent/police through NBW 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 2nd December, police has raised strong objection in releasing the accused on bail. If the accused released on bail, he will tamper the witnesses and he will continue the same kind of offence. 4. The petitioner/accused stated that the petitioner/accused is the only breadwinner of his family. He is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He is a law abiding citizen. He will not abscond or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. He is prepared to furnish substantial sureties to the satisfaction of this Hon'ble Court. No other petition is filed and pending before any other court.

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 14 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 2nd December 2020.

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

K.Krishnan (34) S/o.Karuppusamy .. Petitioner/ Accused

/ Vs/ Inspector of Police, PN Palayam PS, Coimbatore Cr. No.1106 of 2020 ... Respondent/ Complainant

ORDER Bail Application Filed U/s. 437 OF Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner by Advocate Thiru.J.Cibin Samuel, B.A.,B.L.,(Hons) and this application has been received through E-mail. Police submitted reply on 02-12-2020. After considering bail application, 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 409 IPC 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 2nd December, 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 an innocent and he without doing any offence is being under judicial custody and he is the father of just a four years old kind and also he is the breadwinner of his family. His wife and his kind is suffering a lot. He is hailing from a respectable family and also he is having permanent address. He will not abscond or tamper the witnesses. Further the petitioner submit that he is readyto oblige any condition if imposed by this Honorable court and also provide sureties to the satisfaction of this Honorable court.

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 2nd December 2020.

/sd/A.Prabu JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V, COIMBATORE (FAC) IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L., PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3347/2020

Chadenrasekar, (R.P.No.10091) S/o.Desamuthu … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, C-2, Race Course, Police Station Crime No.360/2017 Offence: u/s.302 of IPC and u/s.3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act. Through the Special Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Principal District & Sessions Court, Coimbatore.)

The petition filed by the petitioner through the Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore, praying to release him on bail.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of Thiru. S.Marimuthu, Special Public Prosecutor, represented for State, upon perusing the petition submitted by the petitioner through the Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore, and upon hearing both side arguments, this Court pronounced the following:-

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner filed this petition through the Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore, praying to release him on bail.

The learned Special Public Prosecutor requested to adjourn this petition to 08-12-2020.

At request of the Special Public Prosecutor, this petition is adjourned to 08-12-2020.

Call on 08-12-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Special Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore. 3. The Inspector of Police, C-2, Race Course Police Station, Coimbatore. 4. Petitioner through the Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L., PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3346/2020

Kumar @ Ravikumar (Age 34 years) S/o.Ramaiya … Petitioner / Accused No.4 /vs/ State, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Perur Police Station, Crime No.1100/2020 Offence: u/s.10 and 11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, 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. M.Saravanakumar and B.Suresh, Advocates for the petitioner / Accused No.4 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.1100/2020 of Perur Police Station, since he is apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police, for the alleged offences u/s.10 and 11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of anticipatory 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 Public Prosecutor, this petition is adjourned to 08-12-2020.

Call on 08-12-2020. 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 02nd day of December, 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3345/2020

A.Suresh @ Kulithalai Suresh S/o.Alaguraja Perumal … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, E-1, Singanallur Police Station, Crime No.894/2019 Offence: u/s.379 of IPC Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.3, Coimbatore.)

The petitioner seeks modification of the condition imposed on him in C.M.P.No.3453/2020, dated 22-10-2020.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of Thiru. N.Gowthaman, 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 the learned Judicial Magistrate No.3, Coimbatore in C.M.P.3453/2020, dated 22-10-2020.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that bail was granted to the petitioner on 22-10-2020, by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.3, Coimbatore in C.M.P.3453/2020, with a condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for his personal appearance by producing two sureties for a like sum of Rs.10,000/- each and one of them preferably a blood relative and with at least two identification proof of the sureties, along with other conditions. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner’s parents are old age person and they will not in a position to present before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.3, Coimbatore. Further during the Covid-19 pandemic situation, they were not able to present here. The petitioner’s relatives are ready to stand as surety to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner prayed to modify the condition.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the respondent police registered the case against the petitioner for the offence u/s.379 IPC. The petitioner released on statutory bail u/s.167(2) of Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate considered the nature of offence, has imposed a condition to produce blood sureties.

4. Considering the submissions made by either side, having regard to the nature of offence, and considering the current prevailing situation, this Court is inclined to modify the condition No.(i) in the bail order in C.M.P.3453/2020, dated 22-10-2020 passed by the learned Magistrate in the following manner:-

“(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for his personal appearance by producing two sureties for a like sum of Rs.10,000/- each and one of the them preferably a relative and with at least two identification proof of the sureties.”

As far as other conditions, the earlier order in C.M.P.3453/2020, dated 22-10-2020 passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.3, Coimbatore stands good in all other aspects and the petition is ordered accordingly.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.3, Coimbatore. 2. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 3. The Inspector of Police, E-1, Singanallur 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3344/2020

1. K.S.Bibin S/o.Sankar Narayanan

2. E.Sarafudheen (Age 32 years) S/o.Aboobacker … Petitioners / Accused Nos.1 and 2

/vs/ State, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Mahalingapuram Police Station, Crime No.Not Known Offence: u/s.7, 20 of COTPA Act 2003 and r/w Section 328 of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, 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 Thiru. M.Dharmarajan, 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 petitioners seek anticipatory bail for the alleged offences u/s.7, 20 of COTPA Act, 2003 r/w Sec.328 of IPC. The learned Public Prosecutor is present.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners appeared before this Court and requested to adjourn this petition to some other day.

At request of the petitioners’ counsel, this petition is adjourned to 04-12-2020.

Call on 04-12-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, Mahalingapuram 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3343/2020

Sudhakar (Age 21 years) (A-2) S/o.Ravi … Petitioner / Accused No.2

/vs/ State, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, NIB CID Police Station, Crime No.47/2020 Offence: u/s.8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court, Mettupalayam.)

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. I.Dinesh, 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.47/2020 of NIB CID Police Station, since he is apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police, for the alleged offences u/s.8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of anticipatory bail.

The learned counsel appeared before this Court and made an endorsement on the petition stating that he does not press the petition.

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

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, NIB CID 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3342/2020

A.Eswaran (Age 30 years) S/o.Amachandran … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, C-2, Race Course Police Station, Crime No.310/2020 Offence: u/s.75(1)(c) TNCP Act, u/s.353 of IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.3, 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. 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.310/2020 of C-2, Race Course Police Station, since he is apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police, for the alleged offences u/s.75(1)(c) TNCP Act, and u/s.353 of IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of anticipatory bail.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a practicing Advocate. On the date of occurrence there is some wordy quarrel between the defacto complainant and the petitioner. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner will not abscond and the petitioner is ready to furnish sufficient sureties and prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that occurrence happened on 17- 03-2020 and the same was reported to the respondent police on 18-03-2020. The defacto complainant is Sub-Inspector of Police, attached with the respondent police. On the date of occurrence, the defacto complainant and other police officials were engaged in vehicle checking near Valankulam, Ukkadam-Bye Pass. At that time, the petitioner came in a car. The defacto complainant gave signal to stop the car. But the petitioner did not stop the car and abused the defacto complainant by using filthy language and proceeded his way. The defacto complainant followed the said car with the help of other official and stopped the car. The defacto complainant questioned the petitioner about his act. At that time, the petitioner picked up quarrel with the defacto complainant and abused her by using unwanted words and thereby committed the offence. In this case, investigation is not yet completed.

4. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. In this case, the petitioner is a practicing Advocate. The defacto complainant is the Sub- Inspector of Police. On the date of occurrence, the defacto complainant and other officials engaged in vehicle checking. At that time, this petitioner came in a car. The defacto complainant gave signal to stop the car. But the petitioner did not stop the car and abused the defacto complainant by using filthy language and proceeded his way. The defacto complainant followed the said car with the help of other official and stopped the car. The defacto complainant questioned the petitioner about his act. At that time, the petitioner picked up quarrel with the defacto complainant and abused her by using unwanted words.

5. After considering all the above said aspects, considering the nature of offence, manner of offence said to have been committed by the petitioner, and other circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory 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 02nd day of December, 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-2, Race Course 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3341/2020

Rajesh PV (Age 35 years) S/o.Venu PA … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, D-2, Selvapuram (Crime) Police Station, Crime No.695/2013 Offence: u/s.392 and 395 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 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. M.Anandakumar and R.Loganathan, 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.695/2013 of D-2, Selvapuram (Crime) Police Station, since he is apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police, for the alleged offences u/s.392 and 395 of IPC, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of anticipatory bail.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is present.

The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that reply has not been received and requested to adjourn this petition to 04-12-2020.

At request of the Public Prosecutor, this petition is adjourned to 04-12-2020.

Call on 04-12-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 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 (Crime) 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3340/2020

Arumugham (Age 57 years) S/o.Rangasamy … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Karamadai Police Station, Crime No.296/2019 Offence: u/s.294(b), 324 and 506(ii) 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 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. P.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.296/2019 of Karamadai Police Station, since he is apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police, for the alleged offences u/s.294(b), 324 and 506(ii) of IPC, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of anticipatory bail.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is present.

The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that reply has not been received and requested to adjourn this petition to 03-12-2020.

At request of the Public Prosecutor, this petition is adjourned to 03-12-2020.

Call on 03-12-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, Karamadai 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3339/2020

Kavitha (Age 39 years) D/o.Devappan … Petitioner / Accused No.3

/vs/ State, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Karamadai Police Station, Crime No.305/2019 Offence: u/s.294(b), 323, 354 and 506(i) of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court, Mettupalayam.)

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release her 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.P.Sivakumar, Advocate for the petitioner / Accused No.3 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.305/2019 of Karamadai Police Station, since she is apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police, for the alleged offences u/s.294(b), 323, 354 and 506(i) of IPC, she has filed this petition, seeking grant of anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the wife of A-1. The petitioner is arrayed as A-2. The defacto complainant filed a maintenance case and obtained order in her favour. For the past 8 months, A-1 did not pay any amount to the defacto complainant. Therefore, on the date of occurrence, the defacto complainant and her mother went to A-1’s house and demanded money. At that time, the accused persons jointly picked up quarrel with the defacto complainant and abused the defacto complainant by using filthy language and assaulted her and threatened her.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that this petitioner and the defacto complainant are no way connected. The petitioner is not having any relationship with A-1. This petitioner is an unmarried woman. She has been falsely implicated in this case and she is an innocent and she never committed any offence as alleged and prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that occurrence happened in the year 2019. The defacto complainant is the wife of A-1. They had some family dispute. In this case, investigation is not yet completed.

5. After considering submissions made by either side, having regard to 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 her 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 once in a week i.e., on every Monday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

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

(vi) The petitioner shall not abscond and she 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 02nd day of December, 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3336/2020

Simon Kristopher (Age 29 years) S/o.Mariyasoosai … Petitioner / Accused No.2

/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.)

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.1579/2020 of D-3, Podhanur Police Station, for the alleged offences u/s.120(B), 341, 294(b), 307, 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 the defacto complainant and caused grievous injuries to the defacto complainant and in addition to that they had threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court and submitted that there was some previous enmity between the defacto complainant’s son and the accused. The learned counsel further submitted that in this case, co-accused were released on bail by this Court. The petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he is in judicial custody from 17-10-2020 and prayed to release the petitioner on bail.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted that there are three accused in this case. The defacto complainant and the accused are friends and they used to play cricket in the ground. While so, the accused persons invited the defacto complainant for playing cricket. The defacto complainant refused to join with them. They suspected that the defacto complainant had informed the police about the cell phone robbery. While so, on the date of occurrence, the defacto complainant was walking in the place of occurrence, at that time, the accused persons came there and picked up quarrel with the defacto complainant and assaulted him and caused grievous injuries to him. The learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that except the present case, the petitioner is involved in another three cases in Crime No.1215/2018, 1206/2018 and 221/2016 registered Rathinapuri Police Station. In the above said three cases, one case is registered for the offence u/s.302 IPC and SC/ST Act. Further in this case, investigation is not yet completed. In the said circumstances, if the petitioner is released on bail, he may try to escape and also try to commit same type of offence and hence, the learned Public Prosecutor raised objection to release the petitioner on bail.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The petitioner has been remanded to judicial custody for the offences u/s.120(B), 341, 294(b), 307 and 506(ii) IPC and he is in judicial custody from 17-10-2020. According to the petitioner, he has been falsely implicated in this case. Per contra, it appears from the representation made by the learned Public Prosecutor, during the time of occurrence, the accused persons assaulted the defacto complainant and caused grievous injuries to him. Except the present case, except the present case, the petitioner is involved in another three cases in Crime No.1215/2018, 1206/2018 and 221/2016 registered Rathinapuri Police Station. In the above said three cases, one case is registered for the offence u/s.302 IPC and SC/ST Act. Investigation is not yet completed.

6. After considering all the above said aspects, considering the nature of offence, period of detention, and number of cases pending against 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 02nd day of December, 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. 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3337/2020

1. M.Aakash (Age 21 years) S/o.Mangalanathan

2. M.Vikash (Age 19 years) S/o.Mangalanathan … Petitioners / Accused Nos.1 and 2

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, C-4, Rathinapuri Police Station, Crime No.1295/2020 Offence: u/s.75(1)(b) of TNCP Act and u/s.332, 506(ii) and 307 of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.2, 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. T.Sivakumar and M.Priya, Advocates for the petitioners / Accused Nos.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 are the accused in Crime No.1295/2020 of C-4, Rathinapuri Police Station, for the alleged offences u/s.75(1)(b) of TNCP Act, and u/s.332, 506(ii) and 307 of IPC, they have filed this petition, seeking grant of bail. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is present.

The learned Public Prosecutor 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 04-12-2020.

Call on 04-12-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 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 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3335/2020

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.

ORDER

Heard on both side.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.949/2020 of C-4, Rathinapuri Police Station, 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.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court and made an endorsement on the petition stating that he does not press the petition. In view of the endorsement made by the petitioner’s counsel, this petition is dismissed as not pressed.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3334/2020

Srinivasan (Age 27 years) S/o.Sundaram … Petitioner / Accused No.2

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, E-3, Saravanampatti, Police Station Crime No.1050/2018 Offence: u/s.363 IPC @ Sec.302 and 201 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. K.Churchil, 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.1050/2018 of E-3, Saravanampatti Police Station, for the alleged offences u/s.363 IPC @ Sec.302 and 201 of IPC, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of bail.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14-08-2018. Thereafter the petitioner was released on default bail on 19-11-2018 in C.M.P.6234/2018. The respondent police filed charge sheet before the Judicial Magistrate’s Court No.2, Coimbatore and the same was taken on file in PRC No.42/2019. When the case was posted to 20-08-2019, this petitioner was not able to appear before the lower Court due to his ill-health. Due to the non-appearance of the petitioner, the Magistrate has issued NBW against the petitioner. Thereafter on 20-11-2020, the petitioner was arrested and remanded. The non-appearance of the petitioner is not wanton. As of now, the petitioner is in judicial custody from 20-11-2020 and prayed to release the petitioner on bail.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that this is a jumped bail. Initially the petitioner was released on bail. Subsequently he did not appear before the lower Court. Due to the non-appearance of the petitioner, on 20-08-2019, the learned Magistrate issued NBW against the petitioner. After one year i.e., on 20- 11-2020, the petitioner was arrested at Dharapuram. In the said circumstances, if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every possibility to abscond and hence, the learned Public Prosecutor prayed for dismissal of the petitioner.

4. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on execution of NBW issued by the learned Magistrate. According to the petitioner, due to his ill-health, he was not able to appear before the lower Court. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that on 20-08-2019, the learned Magistrate issued NBW against the petitioner. After one year i.e., on 20-11-2020, the petitioner was arrested at Dharapuram.

5. Considering the submissions made by either side, having regard to the nature of offence, considering the conduct of the petitioner, stage of the case, 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 02nd day of December, 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-3, Saravanampatti 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3333/2020

G.Karthick @ Karthikeyan (Age 36 years) S/o.Gunasekaran … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, Karamadai, Police Station Crime No.693/2020 Offence: u/s.448 of IPC and 3 of TNPPDL Act. 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. P.Krishnamoorthy and P.Selvakumar, 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.693/2020 of Karamadai Police Station, for the alleged offences u/s.448 of IPC and 3 of TNPPDL Act, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on the date of occurrence, the petitioner drove his jeep and dashed against the front gate and caused damages to the gate and windows in the defacto complainant’s house.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court and submitted that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are jointly doing business of construction and real estate. The defacto complainant is liable to pay some amount to the petitioner. The defacto complainant admitted the same in the complaint. 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 from 11-11-2020 and prayed to release the petitioner on bail. Further submitted that the earlier bail petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 24-11-2020 and this is the second bail petition.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted that in this case, occurrence happened on 10-11-2020 and the same was reported to the respondent police on 11-11-2020. The defacto complainant is doing real estate business and construction business. The petitioner and the defacto complainant are already known persons. They had some business transaction. The defacto complainant has to pay some amount to the petitioner. On the date of occurrence, the petitioner drove his jeep and dashed against the front gate and caused damages to the gate and windows in the defacto complainant’s house. In this case, investigation is not yet completed.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The petitioner has been remanded to judicial custody for the offence u/s.448 IPC r/w Sec.3 of TNPPDL Act, 1992, and the petitioner is in judicial custody from 11-11-2020. According to the petitioner, the petitioner and the defacto complainant are jointly doing business of construction and real estate. The defacto complainant is liable to pay some amount to the petitioner. The defacto complainant admitted the same in the complaint. It appears from the representation made by the learned Public Prosecutor, on the date of occurrence, the petitioner drove his jeep and dashed against the front gate and caused damages to the gate and windows in the defacto complainant’s house. Investigation is still going on.

6. The earlier bail petition in C.M.P.3237/2020 filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 24-11-2020 on merits. The petitioners filed this petition on 27-11-2020. This Court specifically asked the petitioner’s counsel, what is the change of circumstance in between 24-11-2020 and 27-11-2020?. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is unable to answer question.

7. After considering all the above said aspects, considering the nature of offence, manner of offence said to have been committed by 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 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, Karamadai 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3332/2020

Bakrudeen Ali Ahamed (Age 40 years) S/o.Mohammed Hanifa … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, C-1, Kattur Police Station, Crime No.110/2020 Offence: u/s.409, 420 and 120(b) of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.2, Coimbatore.)

The petitioner seeks relaxation of the condition imposed on him in C.M.P.No.2957/2020, dated 10-11-2020.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of Thiru. S.Rajendran, 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.2957/2020, dated 10-11-2020.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that bail was granted to the petitioner on 10-11-2020, by this Court, in C.M.P.2957/2020, 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 from 12-11-2020 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 02nd day of December, 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-1, Kattur 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3331/2020

Ahamed Kabir (Age 25 years) S/o.Mohammadu … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, B-1, Big Bazaar Police Station, Crime No.979/2020 Offence: u/s.386 and 506(ii) of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.5, Coimbatore.)

The petitioner seeks relaxation of the condition imposed on him in C.M.P.No.2956/2020, dated 03-11-2020.

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 seeks relaxation of the condition which is already imposed on him by this Court in C.M.P.2956/2020, dated 03-11-2020.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that bail was granted to the petitioner on 03-11-2020, by this Court, in C.M.P.2956/2020, 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 06-11-2020 without any violation. Now the petitioner prayed to relax the condition totally.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, B-1, Big Bazaar 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3330/2020

Samsu @ Samsudeen (Age 35 years) S/o.Saludheen … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, D-4, Kuniyamuthur, Police Station, Crime No.870/2020 Offence: u/s.170, 454, 363, 395 and 397 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.2911/2020, dated 06-11-2020.

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.2911/2020, dated 06-11-2020.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that bail was granted to the petitioner on 06-11-2020, by this Court, in C.M.P.2911/2020, 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 08-11-2020 without any violation. Now the petitioner prayed to relax the condition totally.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 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-4, Kuniyamuthur, 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3329/2020

Muthuselvi (Age 50 years) W/o.Balasubramaniam … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, CCB, Police Station, Crime No.52/2019 Offence: u/s.408, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.6, Coimbatore.)

The petitioner seeks relaxation of the condition imposed on her in C.M.P.No.2974/2020, dated 11-11-2020.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of Tvl. R.Shanmugam and S.Priya 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 her by this Court in C.M.P.2974/2020, dated 11-11-2020.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner on 11-11-2020, by this Court, in C.M.P.2974/2020, with a condition to sign before the respondent police daily twice until further orders. As per the order passed by this Court, the petitioner surrendered before the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Coimbatore on 18-11-2020. Further the petitioner has been complying with the condition from 19-11-2020 without any violation. The petitioner is affected by Cancer and she is having breathing problem also. Hence, the petitioner prayed to relax the condition totally.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3328/2020

R.Thulasidass (Age 33 years) S/o.Ramasamy … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, Chettipalayam Police Station, Crime No.795/2020 Offence: u/s.380 of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court, Madukkarai.)

The petitioner seeks relaxation of the condition imposed on him in C.M.P.No.2782/2020, dated 09-10-2020.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of Tvl. N.Rajendran and N.Rajkumar, 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.2782/2020, dated 09-10-2020.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that bail was granted to the petitioner on 09-10-2020, by this Court, in C.M.P.2782/2020, with a condition to sign before the respondent police once in a week i.e., on every Monday at 10.00 a.m., until further orders. As per the order passed by this Court, the petitioner has been complying with the condition without any violation. Now the petitioner prayed to relax the condition totally.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and has not raised any objection to relax the condition totally.

4. Considering the above said aspects, 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 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, Chettipalayam 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3327/2020

S.Senthil S/o.Selvaraj … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, M-1, Periyanaickenpalayam Police Station, Crime No.966/2020 Offence: u/s.107, 294(b), 448, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 3 of the TNPPDL Act. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.5, Coimbatore.)

The petitioner seeks relaxation of the condition imposed on him in C.M.P.No.2385/2020, dated 03-09-2020.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of Thiru. V.R.Rajkumar, 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 relaxation of the condition which is already imposed on him by this Court in C.M.P.2385/2020, dated 03-09-2020.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner on 03-09-2020, by this Court, in C.M.P.2385/2020, 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 75 days without any violation. Further the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs.1,000/- before the Court concerned. Now the petitioner prayed to relax the condition totally.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, M-1, Periyanaickenpalayam 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3326/2020

1. Jayaraj (Age 26 years) (A-2) S/o.Bannari

2. Shobana (Age 22 years) (A-4) W/o.Sekar … Petitioners / Accused Nos.2 and 4

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, Sirumugai Police Station, Crime No.298/2020 Offence: u/s.294(b), 323, 324, 354 and 307 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.1973/2020, dated 16-07-2020.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of Tvl. P.Krishnamoorthy and P.Selvakumar, Advocates for the petitioners / Accused Nos.2 and 4 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.1973/2020, dated 16-07-2020.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioners on 22-06-2020, by this Court, in C.M.P.Nos.1747/2020 and 1748/2020, with a condition to sign before the respondent police daily twice i.e., until further orders. Thereafter the petitioners filed a petition in C.M.P.1973/2020 to relax the said condition totally. This Court allowed the said petition on 16-07-2020 and directed the petitioners to sign before the respondent police once in a week i.e., on every Monday at 10.00 a.m., until further orders. As per the order passed by this Court, the petitioners have been complying with the condition for the past 15 days 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 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, Sirumugai 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3318/2020

Devaraj (Age 40 years) S/o.Chandran … Petitioner / Accused No.8

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, CCIW (Coimbatore City) Police Station Crime No.1/2020 Offence: u/s.120(b), 406, 408, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477(A), 109 of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.4, 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. V.Suresh Rajendran, Advocate for the petitioner / Accused No.8 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.1/2020 of CCIW (Coimbatore City) Police Station, for the alleged offences u/s.120(b), 406, 408, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477(A), 109 of IPC, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of bail.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is present and requested to adjourn this petition to some other day for production of original title deeds.

The learned Public Prosecutor is present.

At request of the petitioner’s counsel, this petition is adjourned to 07-12-2020.

Call on 07-12-2020 for production of title deeds.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, CCIW (Coimbatore City) 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3288/2020

Parthasarathi (Age 46 years) S/o.Ramalingam … Petitioner / Accused No.1

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, Anaimalai Police Station Crime No.544/2020 Offence: u/s.420 of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Pollachi.)

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. P.Kovendhan, Jafarsadhiq and Vasantha Kumar, Advocates for the petitioner / Accused No.1 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.544/2020 of Anaimalai Police Station, for the alleged offences u/s.420 of IPC, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of bail.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is present. The learned Public Prosecutor requested to adjourn this petition to 03-12-2020.

At request of the Public Prosecutor, this petition is adjourned to 03-12-2020.

Call on 03-12-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, Anaimalai 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3280/2020

N.Udhayasankar (Age 39 years) S/o.Late.Natarajan … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/

State, Rep. by through the Inspector of Police, B-5, Singanallur Police Station, Crime No.Not Known Offence: u/s.294(b), 506(ii), 409 and 420 of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.3, 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. M.Periyasamy, 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 petitioners seek anticipatory bail for the alleged offences u/s.294(b), 506(ii), 409 and 420 of IPC.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court and submitted that the petitioner appeared before the respondent police for enquiry. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that enquiry is pending.

In view of the matter, this petition is adjourned to 15-12-2020.

Call on 15-12-2020. 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 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, B-5, Singanallur 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.

Wednesday, this the 02nd day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3275/2020

P.R.Sabari (Age 29years) S/o.Ravi … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, Rep. by through the Inspector of Police, Periyanaickenpalayam Police Station, Crime No.1088/2020 Offence: u/s.386 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 Thiru. / Tmt. / Selvi. A.Vigneshwari, 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.1088/2020 of Periyanaickenpalayam Police Station, Coimbatore, for the alleged offences u/s.386 of IPC, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of bail.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court and submitted that the defacto complainant is doing barber shop. There was some dispute between the accused and the defacto complainant with regard to money transaction. The learned counsel further submitted that in this case, vehicle has been recovered. 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 from 14-11-2020 and prayed to release the petitioner on bail.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that occurrence happened on 13- 11-2020 and the same was reported to the respondent police on 14-11-2020. The defacto complainant’s native place is Kerala. He is running barber shop. Due to Covid-19, the defacto complainant intended to start a new business. The defacto complainant informed the same to his friend Santhosh. Santhosh introduced one Sabari who is doing real estate business, to the defacto complainant. While so, the defacto complainant contacted the said Sabari and he asked the defacto complainant to come to Coimbatore. On the instruction given by Sabari, the defacto complainant came here along with his friend in his car and met Sabari. Sabari brought the defacto complainant to an abandoned place and threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences and had taken money from the defacto complainant’s pocket. Further the accused persons had taken the car key. In this case, investigation is not yet recovered and car has been recovered.

4. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The petitioner has been remanded to judicial custody for the offence u/s.386 IPC. The petitioner is in judicial custody from 14-11-2020. According to the petitioner, he has been falsely implicated in this case. It appears from the representation made by the learned Public Prosecutor, at the time of occurrence, the accused persons threatened the defacto complainant and had taken the car key. In this case, investigation is not yet recovered and car has been recovered.

5. After considering all the above said aspects, considering the nature of offence, 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 No.5, Coimbatore.

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

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

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

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

(vi) In case of the condition No.(i) to (iv) 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 02nd day of December, 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, 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3268/2020

1. Sabu Joseph (Age 44 years) (A-2) S/o.C.V.Joseph

2. Justin Kuriyan (Age 32 years) (A-3) S/o.V.V.Kuriyan … Petitioners / Accused Nos.2 and 3

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, C-3, Saibaba Colony Police Station Crime No.1278/2020 Offence: u/s.364(A) 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.

The petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of Thiru. S.Karthik, 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 petitioners are the accused in Crime No.1278/2020 of C-3, Saibaba Colony Police Station, for the alleged offences u/s.364(A) of IPC, they have filed this petition, seeking grant of bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant preferred complaint stating that on 08-11-2020, her husband had taken the vehicle Honda Activa and gone to Gandhipuram. But he did not return to the house.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the defacto complainant is the wife of the victim. The victim is running a company under the name and style of Dream Makers Global Private Limited. Due to heavy loss, the said company is not able to settle the amount to the investors. Hence, one EOW case is pending against the defacto complainant’s husband. In the said case, the defacto complainant’s husband was released on anticipatory bail by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The learned counsel further submitted that on the date of occurrence, the victim himself made a phone call to the defacto complainant and stating that he is in a particular pace and he talk after some time. The learned counsel further submitted that they wanted to divert the attention of the investors. The present petitioners are the friends of A-1. The petitioners are no way connected with the victim. The petitioners are the investors and depositors. The petitioners are in judicial custody from 13-11-2020 and prayed to release the petitioners on bail.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that occurrence happened on 08- 11-2020 and the same was reported to the respondent police on 09-11-2020. The defacto complainant preferred complaint stating that on 08-11-2020, her husband had taken the vehicle Honda Activa and gone to Gandhipuram. But he did not return to the house. Already EOW case is pending against the defacto complainant’s husband. On the date of occurrence, the petitioners and yet another accused kidnapped the defacto complainant’s husband in a car and demanded Rs.10.0 lakhs. The leaned Public Prosecutor further submitted that in this case, investigation is not yet completed and car was recovered.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The petitioners have been remanded to judicial custody for the offences u/s.364(A) IPC and the petitioners are in judicial custody from 13-11-2020. According to the petitioners, they are the friends of A-1. They are no way connected with the defacto complainant’s husband. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners and yet another accused kidnapped the defacto complainant’s husband in a car and demanded Rs.10.0 lakhs. Further in this case, investigation is not yet completed and car recovered.

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

(i) The petitioners 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.7, Coimbatore.

(ii) The petitioners are directed to sign before the respondent police, once in a week i.e., on every Monday at 10.00 a.m. until further orders.

(iii) The petitioners or their men shall not tamper the evidence.

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

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

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.7, Coimbatore. 2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore. 3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 4. The Inspector of Police, C-3, Saibaba Colony Police Station, Coimbatore. 5. 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.

nd Tuesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3265/2020

M. Prabhu Shankar (Age 40 years) S/o.Late.N.Manoharan … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. M/s.UBS Publishers Distributors Private Limited Rep. by its General Manager Mr. A.K.Sukumaran

CC.No.340/2018 C.A. No.83/2020 Offence: u/s.138 NI Act. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - II, Coimbatore.)

The petitioner seeks time extension of time to comply the order passed by this Court in C.M.P.No.570/2020, dated 12-02-2020.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of Tvl. P.E.Augustus and L.Janaki, 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 time extension of time to comply the order passed by this Court in C.M.P.No.570/2020, dated 12-02-2020. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court and submitted that the petitioner has been convicted for the offence u/s.138 of NI Act and sentenced to undergo SI for a period of six months and to pay a sum of Rs.17,67,968/- as compensation to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum, in default the petitioner shall undergo SI for a period of three months, imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level-II, Coimbatore in C.C.340/2018, dated 30-01-2020. Against the said judgment, the petitioner preferred a criminal appeal along with petition for suspending the sentence till the disposal of the appeal. The said suspension petition has been numbered as C.M.P.570/2020 and the same was allowed on 12-02-2020. While allowing the said petition, this Court directed the petitioner to execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- with two sureties for likesum each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. Further directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.4,41,992/- and two months time was granted to the petitioner to deposit the said amount. Due to Covid-19 situation, the petitioner is not able to go anywhere and mobilize the amount. Hence, the petitioner comes forward with the present petition seeking extension of time.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor has not raised any serious objection. 4. Considering the reasons put forth on behalf of the petitioner, considering the Covid-19 situation, this Court is inclined to extend time up to 23-12-2020 to the petitioner to deposit the amount and as such the petitioner is directed to deposit Rs.4,41,992/- before the Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level-II, Coimbatore on or before 23-12-2020, failing which this time extension order shall stand automatically cancelled and the earlier order in C.M.P.570/2020, dated 12-02-2020 passed by this Court stands good in all other aspects and the petition is ordered accordingly.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - II, Coimbatore. 3. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused. C.M.P.3240/2020 [Intervening Petition to C.M.P.3201/2020]

Dated:02-12-2020.

In view of the order passed in C.M.P.3201/2020, 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, City Crime Branch Police Station, Coimbatore. 4. Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused. 5. Counsel for the defacto complainant.

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L., PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3210/2020

Vishnu Shankar (Age 52 years) S/o.Maruthachalam … Petitioner / Accused No.3

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, CCIW, Police Station Crime No.1/2020 Offence: u/s.120(b), 406, 408, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477(A) and 109 of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.4, 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.Sampath and K.P.Rahman, Advocates for the petitioner / Accused No.3 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.1/2020 of CCIW Police Station, Coimbatore, for the alleged offences u/s.120(b), 406, 408, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477(A) and 109 of IPC., he has filed this petition, seeking grant of bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other employees of the society have conspired together and misappropriated a sum of Rs.13,29,68,809/-.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court and submitted that this petitioner never took any active role in the alleged offence. In the regular course of the duty, the petitioner did whatever the things instructed by the Secretary of the Society. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is a heart patient and he is taking treatment for the same till date. The learned counsel further submitted that his petitioner is arrayed as A-3 in this case. A-7 is already released on bail. Anticipatory bail was granted to A-4 by this Court. The counsel for the petitioner submitted some original documents before this Court as security.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted his arguments.

Heard. Orders by 03-12-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, CCIW 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3201/2020

C.S.Ramaswamy S/o.Late.P.R.Subramaniam … Petitioner / Accused No.2

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch Police Station Crime No.25/2020 Offence: u/s.420, 465, 468 and 471 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 Thiru. K.R.Sankaran, Advocate for the petitioner / Accused and Thiru. S.Balakumar, Advocate for the defacto complainant / intervener [C.M.P.3240/2020] 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.25/2020 of City Crime Branch Police Station, Coimbatore, since he is apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences u/s.420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of anticipatory bail.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is one of the Directors of Sreevatsa Real Estates Private Limited. The said company is a very reputed one and is doing joint ventures and believing commercial complexes and residential apartments in prime localities in Coimbatore. While so, the defacto complainant approached the petitioner in the year 2005 and offered his land to the petitioner by way of sale. The petitioner also interested to purchase the same. The defacto complainant represented to the petitioner that land acquisition proceedings are pending in respect of the property which is he intended to sell to the petitioner and handed over the papers pertaining to the Writ proceedings and Writ appeals and also the orders of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras, dated 01-04-1998, quashing the land acquisition proceedings. The learned counsel further submitted that the defacto complainant had executed the sale deed for a sale consideration. The portion of the sale consideration was deposited in the name of minor Pavithra. It was not a joint development agreement. It was a sale only. Further in all the sale deeds of other neighbouring owners, the defacto complainant namely Marimuthu figured as witness. Further in the notice sent by the defacto complainant, it is admitted that it was only for the purchase of land. The petitioner purchased the properties of the neighbouring land owners and applied for necessary approval with LPA. As the LPA did not do anything in the matter, the petitioner approached the Hon’ble High Court of Madras and the Hon’ble High Court of Madras passed an order in favour of this petitioner. The petitioner came to know that the Government of Tamil Nadu filed review petition before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras to review the order dated 01-04-1998 and the same was pending and therefore LPA cannot grant any approval. Therefore, the defacto complainant and other land owners executed vakalathnamas and handed over them to be filed before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras. The petitioner with the help of vakalathnamas engaged lawyer and defended the Review Petition filed by the Government of Tamil Nadu in W.P.No.68 and 69/2007. The said WP were allowed and upheld the land Acquisition Proceedings. Feeling aggrieved, Review Petition was filed by the land owners and the same was got dismissed by the order dated 05-10-2009. The defacto complainant and other land owners requested the petitioner to approach the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and executed vakalathnamas for the said purpose. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India was pleased to pass an order of “Status quo” dated 09-07-2012 and the same is in vague till today. The learned counsel further submitted that the allegation of the complainant is that the petitioner forged the signatures of the defacto complainant and neighbouring land owners, in the vakalathnama and other documents which were filed before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The learned counsel further submitted that the respondent police issued summons and the petitioner received the same. Due to some ill-ness, the petitioner was not able to appear before the respondent police to attend enquiry. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation agency and prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant appeared before this Court and submitted that the defacto complainant and others filed a suit in O.S.No.261/2016. In the said suit, the petitioner filed a petition to reject the plaint. The said petition was dismissed by the Vth Additional District Judge, Coimbatore. The defacto complainant caused a notice to the counsels who are allegedly engaged by the petitioner and other land owners, questioning the validity of the vakalathnama. The said counsels have specifically stated in their reply notice that the vakalathnama have been entrusted through the petitioner / accused only. According to the defacto complainant, the petitioner / accused had forged the signatures of the defacto complainant and other land owners and filed the vakalathnamas as if executed by the defacto complainant and others. The offence committed by the petitioner / accused is not an ordinary one. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that occurrence happened on 12-09-2005 and the same was reported to the respondent police on 14-09-2020. Complaint has been given by one Marimuthu. The defacto complainant is having property in Telungupalayam Village and land acquisition proceedings were initiated by the Government of Tamil Nadu. While so, the petitioner approached the defacto complainant and other nearby land owners and promised them that he will be able to release the properties from the land acquisition proceedings. Believing his words, the defacto complainant signed certain documents which were intended to be Joint Development Agreement. But later turned to be a registered Sale deed, as if, it was executed by the defacto complainant in favour of the petitioner herein. But the defacto complainant did not receive any amount from the petitioner. Subsequently, it came to know that the petitioner herein forged the signature of the defacto complainant and others in the vakalathanamas, petitions which were filed before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. After knowing the same, the defacto complainant preferred complaint. Thereafter the respondent police issued summons to the petitioner. But the petitioner, instead of appearing before the respondent police, has sent a letter through post. In this case, investigation is not yet completed.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The respondent police registered the case against the petitioner for the alleged offences u/s.420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC. As per the complaint, the petitioner cheated the defacto complainant. Further, the petitioner herein allegedly forged the signature of the defacto complainant and other land owners in the vakalathanamas, petitions which were filed before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The defence of the petitioner is that the defacto complainant had executed the sale deed for a sale consideration. The sale consideration was paid through bank transaction. It was not a joint development agreement. It was a sale only. Further in all the sale deeds of other neighbouring owners, the defacto complainant namely Marimuthu figured as witness. Further, in the notice sent by the defacto complainant, it is admitted that it was only for the purchase of land. On perusal of the copies of the alleged vakalathnamas, it is seen that the defacto complainant and others executed the alleged vakalathnamas at Chennai and the same were attested by the Advocates at Chennai. The only fact to be unearthed in this case is whether the alleged vakalathnamas said to have been executed by the defacto complainant and other land owners are forged or not? For the said purpose, the custodial interrogation is not necessary. The investigation agency can very well collect the particulars and find out the truth. Hence, this Court does incline to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:-

(i) Pre-arrest 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 No.7, Coimbatore, 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 No.7, Coimbatore, within 15 days from the date of this order.

(iv) The petitioners are directed to sign before the respondent police on all alternative days i.e., Monday, Wednesday, Friday and Sunday of every week at 10.30 a.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.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

Present: Thiru R. SAKTHIVEL, B.A., B.L., PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, COIMBATORE.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3190/2020

Ashraf Ali (Age 35 years) S/o.Bhaseer … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Law and Order South Coimbatore City D-3 Podanur Police Station Crime No.245/2020 Offence: u/s.447, 448, 294(b), 307, 506(ii), 120(B) of IPC r/w Section 15, 16, 18 Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (herein referred after as UA(P) Act. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Principal District and Sessions Court, 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. B.Mohan, A.Nowfal, S.Sheik Mohamed, K.Vasanthakumar, S.Sathiya Balan and A.Mohamed Faisal, 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.245/2020 of D-3 Podanur Police Station, Coimbatore, for the alleged offences u/s.447, 448, 294(b), 307, 506(ii), 120(B) of IPC r/w Section 15, 16, 18 Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (herein referred after as UA(P) Act, he has filed this petition, seeking grant of bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 11-03-2020, at about 18.40 hours, two unknown persons wearing helmet were entered into the premises of the defacto complainant and abused him in filthy language and assaulted him by using iron rod and they threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court through Video Conference and submitted that after the arrest of one Mohammed Haneefa, the Sections 20(B) of IPC is included in the offence by way of alteration report dated 14-03-2020. Thereafter provisions of Unlawful Activities have been invoked without any incriminating materials. Except the inadmissible confession statement and stage managed attitudes, no incriminating materials were placed even for holding any of the offence as against the petitioner. Further submitted that present case is purely a case under the provisions of IPC. But the respondent police converted the same into Unlawful Activities Act. In this case, criminal intimidation is converted to terrorist act by the respondent police. In the complaint itself, there is no whisper to invoke sec.307 IPC. This petitioner is not a Member of any banned organization. Further in this case, co-accused 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 he is in judicial custody 04-08-2020, and prayed to release the petitioner on bail.

4. Opposing to grant bail to the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that one SuriyaPrakash, S/o.Natarajan is residing at MasakkaliKonarThottam, Machampalayam, Sundarapuram in D-3 Podanur Police Station limits in Coimbatore City. He is a Diploma holder in Civil Engineering and he is running an edible oil extracting shop at Madukkarai Market Road by name ‘Lakshmi Mara ChekkuEnnai’. He is functioning as Ward Secretary of Sundarapuram in Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a Hindu Organization for the past 10 years. On 11-03-2020 at about 6.40 p.m., two unknown persons wearing helmets, armed with iron rods, entered in to the said oil shop, abused him in obscene words, challenged him to belong to Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh, expressed their intention to kill him and beat him repeatedly with iron rods causing grievous and simple injuries to him. The injured was rushed to the nearby Abirami Hospital situated at Sundarapuram where the preliminary treatment was given to him. Thereupon the injured went to KG Hospital in Coimbatore City and he was treated there as inpatient for 8 days. On the intimations of injuries from Abirami Hospital and KG Hospital, the Sub Inspector of Police of Podanur Police Station rushed to Abirami Hospital, as the injured was already dispatched to KG Hospital, the Sub Inspector went to KG Hospital, recorded the statement of the injured SuriyaPrakash at 9.15 p.m, and returned to the Police Station and registered the said statement as Cr.No.245/2020 u/s 447, 448, 294(b), 307 and 506(ii) IPC at 10.30 p.m. The Inspector of Police, Podanur Law and Order Police Station took up the investigation at 11.30 p.m. On 14-03-2020 at 8.00 p.m., the Inspector of Police arrested one Mohammed Hanifa, S/o.Abdhul Kafoor in front of Micky Shoe Mart at Variety Hall Road in Coimbatore City who is an active member of Social Democracy Party of India and Popular Friend of India, Muslim Fundamentalist Organizations and recorded his confession statement. Mohammed Hanifa produced a Honda CB Unicorn motor cycle bearing registration No.TN 66 F 2210 which was used by him to come to the place of occurrence with the intention of doing away with SuriyaPrakash and it was seized by the Inspector of Police. Mohammed Hanifa in his confession had stated that one Rameez Raja also had involved himself with the occurrence in this case. On the basis of the said evidence, the Inspector of Police altered the Sections of Law of the case in to 120(B), 447, 448, 294(b), 307 and 506(ii) IPC. On 17-03-2020, the Inspector of Police altered the Sections of Law into Sec.120(B), 447, 448, 294(b), 307, 506(ii) IPC r/w Sections 15, 16 and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention)Act, 1957. On the same day, the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Law and Order, Coimbatore South took up the further investigation of this case as per the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Law and Order. On 29-05-2020, the Assistant Commissioner of Police arrested Jaffar Sathiq @ Babu at 10.00 p.m., at Lanka Corner Road, Flower Market in Coimbatore City and recorded his confession statement. Jaffar Sathiq produced an iron rod and helmet used by him during the occurrence and they were seized by the Assistant Commissioner of Police under a recovery mahazar. On 04-08-2020, the Assistant Commissioner of Police arrested another accused Asraf Ali [petitioner herein] at 2.15 p.m., near the junction of Ponvizha Nagar and South Ukkadam in Coimbatore City and recorded his confession statement. Asraf Ali produced helmet used by him during the occurrence and a Nokia Cell Phone along with shirts and pants worn by him during the occurrence and they were seized by the Inspector under a recovery mahazar. Asraf Ali produced from his house two photos showing that he was taking kalari fight training and two other photos in blue uniform with beret of Popular Friends of India. The other two accused, namely, Rameez Raja and his associate remain to be arrested and they have not yet surrendered themselves before any court. On 10-06-2020 witnesses Ragupathy, S/o.Palaniappan and Kamalakannan, S/o.Kaliappan who had seen the accused petitioner Jaffar Sathiq and Rameez Raja in front of the occurrence shop during the occurrence have correctly identified Jaffar Sathiq during the Test Identification Parade held at Pollachi Sub Jail before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Pollachi. Both witnesses Ragupathy and Kamalakannan have given their statements u/s 164 Cr.P.C before the learned Magistrate. Thereafter on 25-08-2020, the Prosecution has filed a petition before this Court u/s. 167(2) Cr.P.C r/w Sec.43(D)(b) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1957 for extension of period of investigation and the detention of the petitioner as accused and this Court allowed the petition and extended another 90 days time from 26-08-2020. Further submitted that in this case, investigation has disclosed that on the date of occurrence, the accused persons attacked the defacto complainant with a view to kill him. Again on 08-03-2020, Muslim extremists Rameez Raja, an accused in the present case and another damaged a propaganda vehicle of Hindu Friend Party fixed with loud speaker-vide Variety Hall Road Police Station Cr.No.294/2020 U/s 3 of TNPPDL Act. This clearly indicated that few of the members of Muslim organizations have conspired to involve in terrorist act by assaulting or do away with the Hindu community / organization cadres with an intention to threaten the unity, integrity and security of the Hindu community and organizations to instill a sense of terror attack in the minds of a section of people. Further in this case, investigation is not yet completed.

6. This Court considered the submissions made by either side. The petitioner is in judicial custody from 04-08-2020. According to the petitioner, in this case, act of criminal intimidation is converted into terrorist act. The above act does not come under the purview of Sec.15 of the UA(P) Act. Further in this case, co- accused were enlarged on bail by this Court. Further, this petitioner is no way connected with any banned organization. It appears from the representation made by the learned Public Prosecutor, the accused persons involved in this case had met frequently in and around Ukkadam area and conspired to attack RSS and other Hindu organization cadres to show their grudge over the CAA, NRC & NPR Acts passed by the BJP Party ruling in the Central Government. Further the accused persons said to have been acted with a view to threaten the unity, integrity and security of the Hindu community and organizations to instill a sense of terror attack in the minds of a section of people. Investigation is going on.

6. After considering all the above said aspects, considering the nature of offence, period of detention, since co-accused were enlarged on bail by this Court, 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 this Court.

(ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond. Further the sureties shall produce copy of their Aadhaar Card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity.

(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 commit any offences of similar nature.

(v) The petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

(vi) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

(vii) In case of the condition No.(i) to (iv) are violated, it is open to the investigating officer to file appropriate application before this Court for cancellation of bail.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Principal District & Sessions Court, Coimbatore. 2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore. 3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 4. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Law and Order (South), Coimbatore City. 5. The Inspector of Police, D-3, Podanur Police Station, Coimbatore. 6. 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3198/2020

C.Elaiyaraja (Age 40 years) S/o.Chinnasamy … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, Saibaba Colony (Crime) Police Station Crime No.Not Known. Offence: u/s.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 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. V.Chandramouli, 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 offence u/s.420 of IPC.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court and submitted that the petitioner appeared before the respondent police for enquiry.

The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as of now, enquiry is pending.

In view of the matter, this petition is adjourned to 16-12-2020.

Call on 16-12-2020. 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 02nd day of December, 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 (Crime) 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION Nos.3180/2020 and 3338/2020

Habibullah (Age 58 years) S/o.Abdul vahap … Petitioner in C.M.P.3180/2020 / Accused No.2

Karuppusamy (Age 23 years) S/o. Senthilkumar … Petitioner in C.M.P.3338/2020 / Accused

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, Pollachi CSCID Police Station, Crime No.194/2020 Offence: u/s.6(4) of TNSC (RDCS) Order 1982 r/w 7(1)(a)(ii) of EC Act, 1955. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.4, Coimbatore.)

These two petitions filed on behalf of the petitioner in the respective petitions to release them on anticipatory bail u/s.438 of Cr.P.C. [C.M.P.3180/2020] as well as bail u/s.439 of Cr.P.C. [C.M.P.3338/2020].

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 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 petitioner in the respective petitions is the accused in Crime No.194/2020 of Pollachi CSCID Police Station, for the alleged offences u/s.6(4) of TNSC (RDCS) Order 1982 r/w 7(1)(a)(ii) of EC Act 1955, they have filed these two petitions separately, seeking grant of anticipatory bail as well as bail.

2. C.M.P.3180/2020 is filed by the petitioner u/s.438 of Cr.P.C., praying for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. C.M.P.3338/2020 is filed by the petitioner u/s.439 of Cr.P.C., praying to release the petitioner on bail.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 10-11-2020, the accused tried to transport 4000 kgs of PDS rice unauthorisedly.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in C.M.P.3180/2020 submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle. This petitioner is not having the knowledge about the goods which was transported in the vehicle. Further the petitioner is affected by Covid-19 and he is taking treatment for the same. 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 to the petitioner.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in C.M.P.3338/2020 submitted that the petitioner is working as acting driver and he has no knowledge about the PDS rice. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and he has not committed any offence and he is in judicial custody from 10-11-2020 and prayed to release the petitioner on bail.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that occurrence happened on 10- 11-2020 and the same was reported to the respondent police on the same day. There are two accused in this case. On 10-11-2020, the Special Tahsildar and other revenue officials engaged in vehicle checking at Anaimalai Taluk, Vettaikkaranpudur, they intercepted a vehicle TATA 407 bearing Reg. No.KL 16 C 4326. While checking the said vehicle, they found that 80 numbers of bags each contains 50 kgs of PDS rice totally 4000 kgs of PDS rice was loaded in the said vehicle. They enquired the driver [petitioner in C.M.P.3180/2020] who drove the vehicle. On enquiry, it came to know that one Habibullah [petitioner in C.M.P.3338/2020] is the owner of the said vehicle and he instructed him to carry the PDS rice and drop the same in Erimedu. Thereafter they seized the vehicle along with the rice and arrested the driver of the vehicle. After arrest, he gave confession. In this case, investigation is not yet completed.

6. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. The respondent police registered the case against the petitioner in the respective petitions for illegal transportation of 4000 kgs of PDS rice. Normally the PDS rice is used to distribute the poor people. In this case, the petitioner in the respective petitions tried to transport 4000 kgs of PDS rice illegally. Considering the huge quantum of PDS rice, this Court is of the considered view that in order to unearth the truth custodial interrogation is necessary. Hence, this Court is not inclined grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in C.M.P.3180/2020. Accordingly C.M.P.3180/2020 is dismissed.

7. As far as the petitioner in C.M.P.3338/2020 is concerned, he is in judicial custody from 10-11-2020. 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 No.4, Coimbatore.

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

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

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

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

C.M.P.3180/2020 is dismissed. C.M.P.3338/2020 is allowed.

This common order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.4, Coimbatore. 2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore. 3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 4. The Inspector of Police, Pollachi CSCID 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3176/2020

Vikram (Age 21 years) S/o.Ramakrishna … Petitioner / Accused No.1

/vs/ State, through the Inspector of Police, E-1, Singanallur Police Station, Crime No.1834/2020 Offence: u/s.457, 380, 302 of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.3, 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. P.Balasubramanian and K.Chinnadurai, Advocates for the petitioner / Accused No.1 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.1834/2020 of E-1, Singanallur Police Station, for the alleged offences u/s.457, 380, 302 of IPC, 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 03-12-2020.

At request of the Public Prosecutor, this petition is adjourned to 03-12-2020.

Call on 03-12-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 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-1, Singanallur 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3171/2020

S.Balachandran S/o.T.Srinivasan … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/

1. The State through The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore.

2. P.Manickam, S/o.M.Paramasivam

CC. No.114/2019 Offence: u/s.138 NI Act. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - I, Coimbatore.)

The petitioner seeks extension of time to deposit the amount before the Court concerned as per the order passed by this Court in C.M.P.No.833/2020, dated 03-03-2020.

This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of Thiru. J.Subburathinam, 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 extension of time to deposit the amount before the Court concerned as per the order passed by this Court in C.M.P.No.833/2020, dated 03-03-2020.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court and submitted that the petitioner has been convicted for the offence u/s.138 of NI Act and sentenced to undergo SI for a period of six months and to pay a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant, imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level-I, Coimbatore in C.C.114/2019, dated 19-02-2020. Against the said judgment, the petitioner preferred a criminal appeal along with petition for suspending the sentence till the disposal of the appeal. The said suspension petition has been numbered as C.M.P.833/2020 and the same was allowed on 03-03-2020. While allowing the said petition, this Court directed the petitioner to execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- with two sureties for likesum each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. Further directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- and two months time was granted to the petitioner to deposit the said amount. Due to Covid-19 situation, the petitioner is not able to go anywhere and mobilize the amount. Hence, the petitioner comes forward with the present petition seeking extension of time.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor has not raised any serious objection. 4. Considering the reasons put forth on behalf of the petitioner, considering the Covid-19 situation, this Court is inclined to extend time up to 23-12-2020 to the petitioner to deposit the amount and as such the petitioner is directed to deposit Rs.5,00,000/- before the Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level-I, Coimbatore on or before 23-12-2020, failing which this time extension order shall stand automatically cancelled and the earlier order in C.M.P.833/2020, dated 03-03-2020 passed by this Court stands good in all other aspects and the petition is ordered accordingly.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Vth Additional District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore. 2. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 3. The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level - I, 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.2727/2020

Mrs.Mahajabeen (Age 43 years) W/o.Jalaludin … Petitioner / Accused

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

The petition filed on behalf of the petitioner to release her 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.Sujith Nandha Kishore and S.Dinesh Kumar 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 anticipatory bail for the alleged offences u/s.420 IPC.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court and submitted that dispute among the family members. Mediation process failed. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted that in this case, money as well as jewels were involved. As of now, enquiry is pending. The learned Public prosecutor requested to adjourn this petition to some other day.

In view of the facts and circumstances, this petition is adjourned to 14-12-2020.

Call on 14-12-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 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 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.2977/2020

V.Samboornam (Age 65 years) W/o.Late.Vellapan … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, through the Superintendent of GST and Central Excise, Race Course Crime No. Not Known. Offence: u/s.132(1) of CGST Act. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No. , 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. M.Saravanan, Advocates for the petitioner / Accused and Thiru. K.Shanmugananthan, Special Public Prosecutor, GST Cases, 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.132(1) of CGST Act.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court and made an endorsement on the petition stating that she does not press the petition. The learned Special Public Prosecutor for GST Cases is present.

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

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Special Public Prosecutor, GST Cases, Coimbatore. 2. The Superintendent, GST and Central Excise, Race Course, 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.2709/2020

Jalaludeen (Age 48 years) S/o.P.P.Mohamed … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, Rep. by through the Inspector of Police, Kuniyamuthur Police Station, Crime No. Not Known. Offence: u/s. 406, 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 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.Satheesh, 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.406 and 420 IPC.

In view of the facts and circumstances, this petition is adjourned to 14-12-2020.

Call on 14-12-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 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 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.2258/2020

Yuvaraj (Age 37 years) S/o.Chandran … Petitioner / Accused

/vs/ State, Rep. by through the Inspector of Police, AWPS Perur at Podanur Police Station, Now transferred to Vadavalli Police Station, Crime No. Not Known Offence: u/s.498(A) and 406 of IPC. Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Complainant (The Judicial Magistrate Court No.6, 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. P.Ramesh Babu and B.Vinoth, 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 anticipatory bail for the alleged offences u/s.498(A) and 406 of IPC.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner requested to adjourn this petition to 03-12-2020. The learned Public Prosecutor is present.

At request of the petitioner’s counsel, this petition is adjourned to 03-12-2020.

Call on 03-12-2020.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 2. The Inspector of Police, AWPS Perur at Podanur Police Station, Coimbatore. 3. The Inspector of Police, Vadavalli 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.

nd Wednesday, this the 02 day of December, 2020

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3165/2020 (In C.A.220/2020) C.A.No.220/2020 M.C.No.20/2020/A1

(The Sub-Collector - First Grade Magistrate, Pollachi.)

Proceedings u/s.122(1)(b) of Cr.P.C.

(Convicted for breach of bond u/s.122(1)(b) and extended the remand till the completion of the period of the bond i.e., till 25-01-2021)

Abu @ Ibrahim (Aged about 33 years) S/o. Syed Ibrahim … Petitioner / Appellant /vs/

State, rep. by The Inspector of Police, Pollachi Town East Police Station, Pollachi Through the Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. … Respondents / Complainant

This petition is filed by the petitioner / appellant, u/s.389(1) of Cr.P.C., praying to suspend the sentence. This petition is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of Tvl. S.S.Thirumoorthy and K.Muthuvijayan, Advocates 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.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appeared before this Court and submitted that the petitioner has been convicted for breach of bond u/s.122(1)(b) and extended the remand till the completion of the period of the bond i.e., till 25-01-2021, by the Sub-Collector - First Grade Magistrate, Pollachi in M.C.No.20/2020/A1, dated 08-10-2020. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner seeks suspension of sentence. Further submitted that the petitioner is ready to produce sufficient sureties as ordered by this Court in case, this Court does incline to suspend the sentence imposed by the Sub-Collector - First Grade Magistrate, Pollachi. Further submitted that in the order passed by the Sub-Collector - First Grade Magistrate, Pollachi, it is stated that if the petitioner feels aggrieved, he may approach the Sessions Court, Coimbatore. Accordingly, the petitioner approached this Court. In support of his arguments, the learned counsel submitted the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Crl.R.C.No.78/2020 and Crl.M.P.No.464/2020, dated 25-09-2020.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor appeared before this Court and submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender. Sec.110 Cr.P.C. proceedings has been initiated against the petitioner. The petitioner had executed a bond for a period of six months. While so, the petitioner has committed the breach of bond and hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition.

4. This Court has considered the submissions made by either side. On perusal of records, a doubt has arisen in the minds of this Court that whether revision would lie? Or appeal would lie?. The said question will be decided at the time of hearing the main matter.

5. In view of the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Crl.R.C.No.78/2020 and Crl.M.P.No.464/2020, dated 25-09-2020, this Court does incline to suspend the imprisonment imposed by the Sub-Collector - First Grade Magistrate, Pollachi 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 this Court within 15 days from the date of this order.

(ii) 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 case stands posted to 18-01-2021.

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 necessary steps will be taken to secure the petitioner / accused.

This order is dictated to steno-typist, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me via email on this 02nd day of December, 2020.

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

CC to ( sent via email):

1. The IVth Additional District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore. 2. The Sub-Collector - First Grade Magistrate, Pollachi. 3. The Public Prosecutor, Coimbatore. 4. The Inspector of Police, Pollachi Town East Police Station, Pollachi. 5. The Petitioner / appellant through his counsel.