Allowed

S.Vellusamy v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC17 Sept 2013CRL OP(MD)/11856/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted anticipatory bail to two accused persons, S.Vellusamy and Petchiamman, who faced charges for fraud under the IPC. The court observed that the case possessed civil facets and imposed conditions including the execution of a bail bond, appearance for interrogation, and daily police reporting for the first petitioner for one week.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners enlarged on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties; First petitioner to appear daily for one week.

S.Vellusamy Vs the Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

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

¶2

Tuesday, the Seventeenth day of September Two Thousand Thirteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

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

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.11856 of 2013

¶6

1 S.VELLUSAMY

¶7

2 PETCHIAMMAN ... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED No.1 & 2

¶8

¶9

THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KURUVIKULAM POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT, CRIME NO. 137 OF 2013. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

¶10

For Petitioner : M/S.P.SUBBARAJ Advocate

¶11

For Respondent : MRS.S.PRABHA GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE[CRL SIDE]

¶12

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

¶13

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶14

The petitioners pray for the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471 and 420 IPC, in Crime No.137/2013, on the file of the respondent police.

¶15

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners have fraudulently executed a sale deed in favour of them in relating to the property which belongs to de-facto complainant.

¶16

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the affidavit filed by the first petitioner and finding that the matter has civil facets, this Court is of the view that the petitioners can be granted the relief prayed for and accordingly;

¶18

(a) In the event of arrest by or on appearance before the respondent police;

¶19

(b) In the event of appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sankarankovil,; within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order, order,

¶20

(i) The petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on each of them https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ executing a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for the like sum to their satisfaction;

¶21

(ii) First petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 5.30 p.m. for one week and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation. Second petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

¶22

sd/17/09/2013

¶23

/ TRUE COPY /

¶24

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SANKARANKOVIL.

¶27

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUNELVELI. 3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI

¶28

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KURUVIKULAM POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT,

¶29

+1. CC to M/S.P.SUBBARAJ Advocate SR.No.45990.

¶30

Ts/20.09.2013/2p-6c

¶31

ORDER IN

¶32

CRL OP(MD) No.11856 of 2013 Date :17/09/2013

¶33

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

S.Vellusamy v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Vellusamy v. the Inspector of Police

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

Velkumar Vs the Inspector of Police

V.Pandi Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

S.Abdul Khadar Vs the Inspector of Police

M. Syed Abudahir Vs the Inspector of Police

Kasimayan Vs the Inspector of Police

Ponsamraj Vs the Inspector of Police