Allowed

M.Prem Kumar v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC3 Dec 2013CRL OP(MD)/15971/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court regularised interim anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner facing cheating and criminal breach of trust charges. The bail was conditioned upon depositing a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 and appearing daily at the police station for three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted vide order dated 20.09.2013 was regularised subject to deposit of Rs. 1,00,000 and daily police appearance for three weeks.

M.Prem Kumar Vs the Inspector of Police — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

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

¶2

Tuesday, the Third day of December Two Thousand Thirteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.SATHYANARAYANAN

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.15971 of 2013

¶6

M.PREM KUMAR ... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.1

¶7

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, RAMANATHAPURAM , RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT, CRIME NO. 8 OF 2013 ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT

¶8

For Petitioner : M/S.M.PITCHAIMUTHU Advocate For Respondent : M/S.S.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶9

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

¶10

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶11

Totally there are four accused in this case. The petitioner, who is arrayed as A-1 apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 506(i) of I.P.C in Crime No.8 of 2013 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶12

The case of the prosecution is that all the petitioners made a promise to the de-facto complainant to secure a job at Techno Mahendra Company and on that pretext, received a sum of Rs.4,73,000/- between 2011-2012. But the petitioners neither secured a job nor returned the amount to the de-facto complainant.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is falsely implicated in this case and this Court vide order dated 20.09.2013 has granted interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner and insofar as A-2 is concerned, he was enlarged on bail subject to payment of Rs.75,000/- vide order dated 19.09.2013 in Crl.O.P(MD)No.15970 of 2013 and insofar as A-4 is concerned, he was enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 02.09.2013 in Crl.O.P (MD)No.14165 of 2013. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner/A-1 without prejudice to his rights and contentions, is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ready to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the credit of Crime No.8 of 2013.

¶14

The learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) would submit that one of the accused is absconding and that the investigation is pending.

¶15

This Court taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances, is regularising the interim anticipatory bail granted by this Court vide order dated 20.09.2013 subject to the following conditions:

¶16

(i) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh Only) to the credit of Crime No.8 of 2013 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Rameshwaram, on or before 16.12.2013.

¶17

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 11.00 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required.

¶18

(iii) The other conditions imposed in the order dated 20.09.2013 shall stand.

¶19

(iv) If the petitioner failed to comply with any one of the conditions imposed by this Court, the anticipatory bail granted by this Court shall stand automatically vacated without further reference to this Court.

¶20

/ TRUE COPY /

¶21

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

¶22

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶23

Madurai - 625 023.

¶24

¶25

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,RAMESWARAM 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE RAMANATHAPURAM

¶26

3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶27

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, RAMANATHAPURAM , RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT,

¶28

+1. CC to M/S.M.PITCHAIMUTHU Advocate SR.No.59957 RL/6 C- 4/12/2013

¶29

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

M.Prem Kumar v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Prem 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

Mariappan Vs the Inspector of Police

Prabakaran, Vs the State

Ponuchamy Vs the Sub - Inspector of Police

Manimaran Vs the Inspector of Police

R. Jeyakumar Vs J. Durga Devi

M. Muthuraman Vs the Inspector of Police