Madurai Bench of Madras High Court granted bail to the petitioner, an accused remanded for over 60 days, in a case involving offences under sections 294(B), 324, 307, and 506(ii) IPC, considering the discharge of the injured.
Petitioner released on bail via personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and directed to appear at police station daily.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Ninth day of April Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM
CRL OP(MD) No.4605 of 2015
ARUMUGAM ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2
Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THALAMUTHU NAGAR POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI.
(CRIME NO.60/2015) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
For Petitioner : M/S.T.ANTONY ARUL RAJ Advocate
For Respondent : MR.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)
PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-
The petitioner is A2 and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 07.02.2015 for the alleged offences punishable under sections 294(B), 324, 307 and 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.60 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that due to dispute over letting out the draining water, on 30.01.2015 the accused persons have attacked the injured.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that this is a case of case and counter and in this case, the accused persons are son, father and mother respectively and the petitioner, who is the father has been arrayed as A2 and he has been in judicial custody for more than 60 days and A3 was already granted anticipatory bail by this court.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the injured has been discharged from the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ hospital and the major portion of the investigation is over.
2
5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and the petitioner is in jail since 07.02.2015, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, on his executing a personal 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 Judicial Magistrate No.II, Thoothukudi and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders.
/ TRUE COPY /
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
TO
1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, THOOTHUKUDI.
3 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, SUB JAIL, SRIVAIKUNDAM, TUTICORIN DISTRICT.
PA/09.04.2015/2P/7C
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner deserves bail on the facts and circumstances of the case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Arumugam
State Rep. By the Inspector of Police Thalamuthu Nagar Police Station, Thoothukudi
K.Kalynasundaram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
