Allowed

R. Pravinkumar v. State Rep by Inspector of

Madras HC8 Oct 2015CRL OP(MD)/15483/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought anticipatory bail apprehending arrest for alleged cheating and criminal breach of trust. Court granted bail contingent upon appearance before Magistrate, executing a bond, producing two sureties, and appearing daily at police station for two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail contingent on appearance before Magistrate, bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, and daily police appearance for two weeks.

R. Pravinkumar Vs State Rep by Inspector of — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

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

¶2

Thursday, the Eighth day of October Two Thousand Fifteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.15483 of 2015

¶6

R. PRAVINKUMAR ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN

¶7

¶8

THE STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, USILAMPATTI TOWN POLICE STATION, USILAMPATTI, MADURAI DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.NOT KNOWN OF 2015) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

¶9

For Petitioner : M/S K.SEEMARAJ Advocate

¶10

For Respondent : MRS.S.PRABHA, Govt. 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 arrayed as accused, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 IPC on the file of the respondent Police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶14

2.According to the de facto complainant, the accused, who had given promise of giving share in the income from the business, borrowed a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- in January, 2014 from the de facto complainant and later neither paid amount nor give any share from the business and thereby cheated.

¶15

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted the de facto complainant is a financier and the petitioner has borrowed Rs.50,000/from him and repaid Rs.1,05,000/- with interest, but, the present complaint is given with an ulterior motive.

¶16

4.Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent Police.

¶17

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Magistrate No.I, Usilampatti, and on 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

¶18

further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 am for a period of two weeks. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

¶19

6.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.

¶20

sd/-

¶21

08/10/2015

¶22

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶23

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.1, USILAMPATTI 2 DO THRO THE CHEIF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,MADURAI DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, USILAMPATTI TOWN POLICE STATION,USILAMPATTI, MADURAI DISTRICT. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶24

+1. CC to M/S K.SEEMARAJ Advocate SR.No.59716.

¶25

ORDER

¶26

¶27

CRL OP(MD) No.15483 of 2015

¶28

Date :08/10/2015

¶29

AM/13.10.2015/SK.SKN/SAR-II/2P/6C

¶30

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

R. Pravinkumar v. State Rep by Inspector of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R. Pravinkumar v. State Rep by Inspector of

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

K. Anbalagan Vs State Rep by Inspector of

S.K. Sudhakar Vs State Rep by Inspector of

S.V. Kalimuthu Vs the Inspector of Police

Saai Vijayakumaravel Vs the Deputy Superintendent

N. Selvendran Vs the Inspector of Police

David Packiya Babu Vs State Rep by Inspector of