Allowed

Sekar v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC24 Jun 2014CRL OP(MD)/10745/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners accused of offences under the IPC, conditioning release on appearance before a Magistrate, execution of a bond with sureties, and daily appearance before the police station.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted conditional on execution of bond with sureties, appearance before Magistrate within 15 days, and daily police appearance for four weeks.

Sekar Vs the Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

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

¶2

Tuesday, the Twenty Fourth day of June Two Thousand Fourteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.S.RAMANATHAN

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.10745 of 2014

¶6

1 SEKAR

¶7

2 RAVI ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 2 & 3

¶8

¶9

STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE TENKASI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. CR.NO.219 OF 2014 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶10

For Petitioner : M/S.N.MOHIDEEN BASHA Advocate

¶11

For Respondent : MR.C.MAYIL VAHANA RAJENDRAN Addl.Public Prosecutor

¶12

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

¶13

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶14

The petitioners, who are arrayed as A2 and A3, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 307 and 506(ii) of I.P.C. in Crime No.219 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

¶15

2.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence and prays for anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioners.

¶16

3.It is submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the injured has been treated as out patient.

¶17

Considering the submissions made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and also considering the fact that the injured person had already been discharged from the hospital, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions.

¶18

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi and on each of them 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 shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of four weeks. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ scrupulously.

¶19

The petitioners 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.

¶20

/ TRUE COPY /

¶21

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶22

¶23

2 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,TENKASI

¶24

3 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,TIRUNELVELI

¶25

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE TENKASI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

¶26

4 THE ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶27

+1. CC to M/S.N.MOHIDEEN BASHA Advocate SR.No.33484

¶28

AA/25.06.2014/2p- 6c/

¶29

CRL OP(MD) No.10745 of 2014

¶30

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

Sekar v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sekar 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

Kothar Mudeen @ Kotheri Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

P.Natarajan Vs the Inspector of Police

Sriya Pushpam Escalin Vs the Inspector of Police

Alagan Vs the Inspector of Police

Palpandi Vs the Inspector of Police

Ramu Vs the Inspector of Police