Disposed

Saravana Kumar v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC6 Sept 2013CRL OP(MD)/12849/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court granted a two-week interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner, an accused in Cheque Dishonour and Cheating offences, pending full consideration of the plea after hearing counsel.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted for two weeks; petitioner to execute bond and appear before Judicial Magistrate within 15 days.

Saravana Kumar Vs the Inspector of Police — Cheque Dishonour | 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.12849 of 2013

¶6

SARAVANA KUMAR ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED No.1

¶7

¶8

1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CITY CRIME BRANCH, TIRUNELVELI CITY, CRIME NO. 10 OF 2013.

¶9

... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.T.A.EBENEZER Advocate

¶10

For Respondent : Mrs.S.Prabha Government Advocate Crl.Side

¶11

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

¶12

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶13

The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.1, prays for the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 465, 467, 471 and 420 IPC in Crime No.10 of 2013 on the file of the respondent police.

¶14

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has sold the vehicle Tata Ace to the fifth accused without paying the finance due to the de-facto complainant finance company.

¶15

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that recently the petitioner came to know about the non-payment of due by the fifth accused. Further, the fifth accused was arrested and released on bail. This petitioner is nothing to do with the alleged offence.

¶16

Heard the learned Government Pleader (Crl. side) on the above submissions. She would strongly object to grant of anticipatory bail.

¶17

In view of the above circumstances, this Court is of the view that the petitioner can be granted the relief of interim anticipatory bail for a period of two weeks from today and accordingly;

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

(b) In the event of appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tirunelveli within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order,

¶21

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

¶22

sd/06/09/2013

¶23

/ TRUE COPY /

¶24

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.I, TIRUNELVELI.

¶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 CITY CRIME BRANCH, TIRUNELVELI CITY.

¶29

+1. CC to M/S.T.A.EBENEZER Advocate SR.No.44555.

Ts/12.09.2013/2p-6c

ORDER

CRL OP(MD) No.12849 of 2013

¶34

Date :06/09/2013

¶35

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

Saravana Kumar v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saravana Kumar 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

P.Manikandan Vs the Inspector of Police

Marriyappan Vs the Inspector of Police

B.Ushman Vs the Inspector of Police

Ramalingam Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Mariyammal Vs the Inspector of Police

Chelladurai Vs the Inspector of Police