Allowed

Ramalingam v. the Assistant Commissioner

Madras HC6 Sept 2013CRL OP(MD)/10883/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail petition, the Madras High Court allowed the applicant to be enlarged on personal bond with conditions regarding availability for interrogation and non-interference.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties; petitioner must be available for daily interrogation for two weeks and shall not induce witnesses.

Ramalingam Vs the Assistant Commissioner — Property and Title | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶2

Friday, the Sixth day of September Two Thousand Thirteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice C.T.SELVAM

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.10883 of 2013

¶6

RAMALINGAM . .PETITIONER/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN

¶7

¶8

THE STATE REP BY

¶9

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ANTI LAND GRABBING SPECIAL CELL, TRICHY CITY,

¶10

CRIME NO.NOT KNOWN OF 2013 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶11

For Petitioner : M/S.P.T.RAMESH RAJA Advocate For Respondent : M/S.S.PRABHA,Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶12

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

¶13

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶14

The petitioner prays for the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C for offences punishable under Sections 408, 418, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 420 IPC on the file of the respondent police.

¶15

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that petition enquiry is pending. However, she submits that on conclusion of the enquiry, there is possibility of registering the case for cognizable offences.

¶16

On consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made, this Court is of the view that the petitioner can be granted the relief prayed for and accordingly; (a) In the event of arrest by or on appearance before the respondent police;

¶17

(b) In the event of appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Trichy within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order,

¶18

(i) the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties for the like sum to their satisfaction;

¶19

(ii)the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts

¶20

to the Court or to any Police Officer;

¶21

(iii)the petitioner shall be available for interrogation by the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for two weeks and thereafter as and when required.

¶22

sd/06/09/2013 / TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V TRICHY 2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TRICHY DISTRICT 3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ANTI LAND GRABBING SPECIAL CELL, TRICHY CITY, 4.THE ADDITIONAL .PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S.P.T.RAMESH RAJA Advocate SR.No.44967 RL/6C - 12/9/2013 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10883 of 2013 Date :06/09/2013

¶23

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Ramalingam v. the Assistant Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramalingam v. the Assistant Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Manikandan Vs the Inspector of Police

Marriyappan Vs the Inspector of Police

B.Ushman Vs the Inspector of Police

Mariyammal Vs the Inspector of Police

Saravana Kumar Vs the Inspector of Police

Chelladurai Vs the Inspector of Police