Allowed

C. Andrews Vasudevan v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC6 Apr 2015CRL OP(MD)/19450/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to accused petitioners falsely implicated in an IPC 498A/406 case after the police filed the charge sheet, subject to bail bonds and movement restrictions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail upon execution of bond for Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties, subject to conditions of appearance and non-absconding.

C. Andrews Vasudevan Vs the Inspector of Police — Domestic Violence | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

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

¶2

Monday, the Sixth day of April Two Thousand Fifteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.19450 of 2014

¶6

1 C. ANDREWS VASUDEVAN

¶7

2 SAKUNTHALA

¶8

3 MALARKODI

¶9

4 SIGAMANI ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4

¶10

¶11

STATE REPRESENTED THROUGH

¶12

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, NAGERCOIL, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT, CRIME NO.18/2014 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

¶13

For Petitioner : M/S.K.SAMIDURAI Advocate For Respondent : M/S.K.V.RAJARAJAN,

¶14

Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶15

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

¶16

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶17

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for an alleged offence punishable under Sections 498(A) and 406 of IPC in Crime No.18 of 2014, seek anticipatory bail.

¶18

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case.

¶20

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that after investigation, the respondent Police has already filed charge sheet.

¶21

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ considering the fact that the charge sheet has already filed by the respondent Police, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the

¶22

petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Boothapandi on condition that each of the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

¶23

[a] the first petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners 2 and 3 being ladies shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

¶24

[b] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶25

[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶26

/ TRUE COPY /

¶27

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶28

¶29

1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BOOTHAPANDI

¶30

2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

¶31

KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT AT NAGERCOIL

¶32

3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶33

MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI

¶34

4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

¶35

ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION, NAGERCOIL, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT

¶36

RL/5 C- 9/4/2015

¶37

CRL OP(MD) No.19450 of 2014

¶38

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

C. Andrews Vasudevan v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C. Andrews Vasudevan 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

K.S.Veerakumar Vs S.Saranya

Kannappan@Shanmuga Vs P.Meenakshi

Jayanthilal Vs V.M. Muthu Kumar

A.Pandi Vs the Inspector of Police

Sannasi Kumar Vs the Inspector of Police

R.Sathiyaseelan, Vs the Inspector of Police