This court granted anticipatory bail to two accused persons facing charges of theft and criminal conspiracy, issuing guidelines for their release on bail bonds and daily police reporting.
Petitioners granted anticipatory bail with conditions of bond execution (Rs. 10,000/-) and daily appearance at Thukalay police station.
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.
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Thursday, the Sixteenth day of April Two Thousand Fifteen
PRESENT
THE HON`BLE MR JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
CRL OP(MD) No.4839 of 2015
1 SUNDAR SINGH 2 SAJITHA ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2
Vs
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVATTAR POLICE STATION, THIRUVATTAR, KANYAKUMARAI DISTRICT. (CR.NO. 601/2014) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
For Petitioner : M/S.L.GEORGE PAUL ANTO Advocate
For Respondent : MR.K.V.RAJARAJAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4839 of 2015
K.KALYANASUNDARAM,J.
The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1 and A2, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 381 (NP) and 109 IPC in Crime No.601 of 2014 on the file of the respondent Police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that first accused had arranged the second accused as servant-maid in the de facto complainant's house and on 10.11.2014 the second accused had stolen away gold jewels worth of 130 sovereigns and cash of Rs.4,47,000/-.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been wrongly implicated in this case.
4.The respondent has filed a status report stating that sisters of the de facto complainant namely, Sheela and Barshiya have been pledging the jewels of the de facto complainant with so many finance companies.
5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Padmanabhapuram at Thukalay and on each of them 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 petitioners shall https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ appear before the respondent police daily at 10 a.m. until further orders. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
TO
+1cc to MR.L.GEROGE PAUL ANTO, ADVOCATE IN SR : 18940 SR/IV : 21.04.2015 : 2P/6C
CRL OP(MD) No.4839 of 2015
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioners apprehending arrest under Sections 381 and 109 IPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SUNDAR SINGH
SAJITHA
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVATTAR
K. KALYANASUNDARAM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
