Partly allowed

Sumathi v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC3 May 2013CRL OP(MD)/6837/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court exercised its powers under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on a bail petition filed by two accused persons in a cheating case. The Court enlarged the first accused on bail solely due to the health risks to his one-year-old child in jail custody, while dismissing the bail prayer for the second accused due to pending investigation.

What did the court decide?

First petitioner released on bail with conditions; bond of Rs. 5,000 with sureties and monthly reporting ordered. Bail prayer for second petitioner dismissed.

Sumathi Vs the Inspector of Police — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

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

¶2

Friday, the Third day of May Two Thousand Thirteen

¶3

PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice S.VIMALA CRL OP(MD) No.6837 of 2013

¶4

1 SUMATHI 2 SELVAM

¶5

... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED NO.1 & 2

¶6

THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, TRICHY DIST, CR.NO.3/2013. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

¶7

For Petitioner : M/S. K.SAMIDURAI Advocate

¶8

For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶9

PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

¶10

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶11

The petitioners/A.1 and A.2 have been arrested on 26.03.2013 and remanded to judicial custody in respect of the alleged offences under Sections 420, 120(b), 506(i) I.P.C in Crime No.3 of 2013 on the file of the respondent police and hence, they have come forward with this petition seeking bail.

¶12

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶13

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners along with two others, have been running a Trust in the name of 'Beem Trust', by which the petitioners were giving loan to the poor people and thereafter, the defacto complainant and others had given money to get the loan amount and after receiving the same, the petitioners cheated the defacto complainant and therefore, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint and a case in Cr.No.3 of 2013 has been registered by the respondent police for the alleged commission of the above said offences. Thereafter, the petitioners/A.1 and A.2 have been arrested on 26.03.2013 and remanded to judicial custody.

¶14

It is represented by the learned Counsel for the petitioners/A.1 and A.2 that the first petitioner is having a child aged one year and it is very difficult to manage the child inside the jail premises and hence, he prays for enlarging the petitioners/A.1 and A.2 on bail.

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5. This fact is not disputed by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side).

¶16

Considering the paramount health of the child, especially, in the hot summer where infection is inevitable in the crowded jail, this Court is inclined to enlarge the first petitioner/A.1 alone, on bail and accordingly, the first petitioner/A.1 is ordered to be released on bail subject to the following conditions:

¶17

(i) The first petitioner/A.1 shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) with two sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Thuraiyur; and

¶18

(ii) The first petitioner shall report before the learned Magistrate concerned once in a month, on Monday and sign before the Court concerned at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶19

Insofar as the second petitioner/A.2 is concerned, having regard to the fact that the investigation is pending, this petition is dismissed.

sd/-

03/05/2013

/ TRUE COPY /

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO

¶24

1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,THURAIYUR.

¶25

2.-DO-THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,TRICHY.

¶26

3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶27

MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶28

4.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL PRISON FOR WOMEN,TRICHY.

¶29

5.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY.

¶30

6.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

¶31

DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, TRICHY DISTRICT.

¶32

+1. CC to M/S. K.SAMIDURAI Advocate SR.No.26273

¶33

ORDER

¶34

¶35

CRL OP(MD) No.6837 of 2013 Date :03/05/2013 RG.07.05.2013 2P/8C

¶36

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

Sumathi v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumathi 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

Ronickammal Vs Manoharan

1.SELVAM Vs Mangaiyarkarasi

Kondi and 4 Others Vs Chellamuthu and 4 Others

Anitha Vs the Inspector of Police

Salai Sivasubramanian Vs the Inspector of Police

Beermohamed Vs the Inspector of Police