Allowed

V.Veluchamy Nadar v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC8 Sept 2014CRL OP(MD)/13413/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, accused in a criminal complaint for cheating, intimidation, and harassment. The order noted that the dispute over land sale consideration had been settled, allowing release upon executing a bond and complying with specific reporting conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted bail upon execution of bond for Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, reporting to police daily for one week, and complying with Section 438 Cr.P.C. conditions.

V.Veluchamy Nadar Vs the Inspector of Police — Domestic Violence | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

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

¶2

Monday, the Eighth day of September Two Thousand Fourteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.13413 of 2014

¶6

V.VELUCHAMY NADAR ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED

¶7

1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KARIVALAMVANTHANALLUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. CRIME NO. 162 OF 2013. ... 1ST RESPONDENT/1ST RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

¶8

2 RAMASUBBU ... 2ND RESPONDENT/PROPOSED RESPONDENT (R2 is impleaded as per the / DEFACTO COMPLAINANT order of this Hon`ble Court dt.08.09.2014 and made in MP(MD)No.1 of 2014 in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13413 of 2014)

¶9

For Petitioner : M/S.M.SHEIK ABDULLAH Advocate

¶10

For Respondent : Mr.K.Anbarasan, 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 the sole accused, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under sections 468, 294(B), 506(ii) of IPC and section 4 of Tamil Nadu Protection of Women from Harassment Act, in Crime No.162 of 2013, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶14

2.The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant purchased land from the accused on 07.04.2010 and when she applied for change of patta, she came to know that the land was already sold by the mother of the accused. On 28.07.2013, the accused agreed to return the sale consideration, but subsequently threatened the de-facto complainant and abused her with filthy language.

¶15

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has returned the entire sale consideration to the de-facto complainant. The de-facto complainant is also present before this court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) has also verified the factum of settlement and reported that the matter was already settled

¶17

between the petitioner and the de-facto complainant.

¶18

5.In view of above, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions.

¶19

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sankarankovil and on his 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 petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. for a period of one week and thereafter as and when required. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

¶20

7.The petitioner 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.

¶21

sd/-

¶22

08/09/2014

¶23

/ TRUE COPY /

¶24

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

¶25

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶26

Madurai - 625 023.

¶27

¶28

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SANKARANKOVIL

¶29

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUNELVELI

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

+1cc to Mr.M.Sheik Abdullah ,Advocate Sr.No. 51971

¶33

ORDER

¶34

¶35

CRL OP(MD) No.13413 of 2014

¶36

Date :08/09/2014

¶37

gdr 11.09.2014 2p/6C

¶38

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

V.Veluchamy Nadar v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Veluchamy Nadar 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

C.Selvam Vs the Inspector of Police

Mr. Jefferson Pon David Vs the Inspector of Police

Jayanthi Vs the Inspector of Police

V.Thirunavukkarasu Vs the Inspector of Police

K.Vasanth Vs the Inspector of Police

Abbas Ali Vs the Inspector of Police