Allowed

Muthuvel v. the Sub-Inspector of Police

Madras HC9 Feb 2015CRL OP(MD)/14290/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court heard a petition for anticipatory bail filed by two accused persons facing charges under sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, and 506(ii) of the IPC. The Court reviewed the failure report from the mediation centre and facts regarding the dispute and converted the interim bail into absolute bail.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners earlier is made absolute; no new sureties required.

Muthuvel Vs the Sub-Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

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

¶2

Monday, the Ninth day of February Two Thousand Fifteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON`BLE MR JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.14290 of 2014

¶6

1 MUTHUVEL

¶7

2 BOOMI @ NATARAJAN

¶8

... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1, 3

¶9

¶10

THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE NARIKUDI POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT. CRIME NO.91/2014 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶11

For Petitioner : M/S.S.MUNIYANDI Advocate

¶12

For Respondent : MR.A.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶13

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

¶14

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶15

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294 (b), 323 and 506(ii) of Indian Penal Code, in Crime No.91 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶16

This Court had granted interim anticipatory bail to the petitioners on 01.08.2014 and the matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, attached to this Bench. The Mediation and Conciliation Centre has sent a failure report dated 24.09.2014. It is seen that these petitioners and the defacto complainant are close relatives and they had quarreled because the petitioners were attempting to cut a tree in the land allegedly belonging to the defacto complainant.

¶17

It is represented by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. There is no previous case against these petitioners.

¶18

Under such circumstances, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners is made absolute. The petitioners need not execute any fresh sureties, as the sureties already executed for the purpose of availing interim anticipatory bail shall hold good. However, the petitioners have to appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

¶19

/ TRUE COPY /

¶20

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

¶21

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

¶22

¶23

THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ARUPPUKKOTTAI.

¶24

-DO- THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR.

¶25

THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE NARIKUDI POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DT.

¶26

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

¶27

SR : 12.02.2015 : 2P/5C

¶28

ORDER IN

¶29

CRL OP(MD) No.14290 of 2014

¶30

Date :09/02/2015

¶31

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

Muthuvel v. the Sub-Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muthuvel v. the Sub-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

Syed Abdul Haq Vs the Inspector of Police

K.Ramamurthy Vs the Inspector of Police

Selvaraj Vs the Inspector of Police

Ramanathan Vs the Inspector of Police

Mani Murugan Vs the Inspector of Police

Smt. Kaliammal Vs the Interlligence Officer