Partly allowed

Thirumal v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC17 Jun 2013CRL OP(MD)/9288/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court entertained a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. against multiple accused. The court dismissed the petition for petitioner No.13 as withdrawal of prayer was endorsed but granted bail with reporting conditions to the remaining petitioners.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed for Petitioner No.13; anticipatory bail granted to Petitioners 1 to 12 and 14 to 16 with bond and reporting conditions.

Thirumal Vs the Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Seventeenth day of June Two Thousand Thirteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.9288 of 2013

¶2

1 THIRUMAL 2 CHINNASAMY 3 MURUGAN 4 PETHANAN 5 GANESAN 6 MURUGAN 7 VEMPADIYAN

¶3

8 THAALAI 9 RADHAKRISHNAN 10 NARASINGAM 11 SATHURAGIRI 12 LAKSHMANAN 13 PERUMAL 14 PANDI 15 AMMASI 16 KUMAR @ THOTHA KUMAR ... PETITIONER(S) / ACCUSED No. 1 to16

¶4

¶5

THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PERAIYUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT. CRIME NO.117 OF 2013. ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT

¶6

For Petitioner : M/S.K.MURUGAN Advocate

¶7

For Respondent : Mr.A.P.Balasubramanian Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶8

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

¶9

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶10

The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections147, 148, 341, 294(b),307 of I.P.C., and r/w 109 and 149 of I.P.C., in Crime No.117 of 2013 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that he is not pressing this petition for anticipatory bail in respect of the petitioner No.13/A13 since he is arrested and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. He further submitted that the other petitioners are an innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case and hence, he prays for anticipatory bail in favour of the third petitioner.

¶12

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit that the injured has already been discharged from the hospital and the investigation is considerably over and hence, he prays for dismissal of this application.

¶13

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

¶14

In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this petition is dismissed as not pressed in respect of the petitioner No.13/A13 and also considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners Nos.1 to 12 & 14 to 16 with certain conditions.

¶15

Accordingly, the petitioners Nos.1 to 12 & 14 to 16 are ordered to be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate NO.II, Usilampatti, on each executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners Nos.1 to 12 & 14 to 16 shall report before the Court concerned daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. The petitioners Nos.1 to 12 & 14 to 16 shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

¶16

The petitioners Nos.1 to 12 & 14 to 16 shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

¶17

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶18

¶19

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE. NO.II, USILAMPATTI.

¶20

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE MADURAI.

¶21

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

¶22

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PERAIYUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT. +1. CC to M/S.K.MURUGAN Advocate SR.No.30787 TS/19.06.2013/2P-6C

¶23

ORDER IN

¶24

CRL OP(MD) No.9288 of 2013 Date :17/06/2013

¶25

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

Thirumal v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thirumal 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

B.Radhakrishnan Vs the Inspector of Police

A.Saibunnisa Vs the Deputy Superintendent

B.Suriyanarayanan, Vs the Superintendent of Police

N. Kandasamy Vs the Inspector of Police

Ravikumar Vs the Inspector of Police

Saravanan Vs the Inspector of Police