Disposed

Krishnan v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC3 Jun 2016CRL MP(MD)/4084/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a bail petition seeking dispensation with personal appearance before the Assistant Sessions Judge. The court noted the appellant had appeared for a long period and was absent only due to hospitalization from a road accident. Despite the pending appeal, the court lifted the appearance condition due to no flight risk.

What did the court decide?

Lifted the condition for the appellant's personal appearance before the Assistant Sessions Judge.

Krishnan Vs the Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

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

¶2

Friday, the Third day of June Two Thousand Sixteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Dr.Justice P.DEVADASS

¶5

CRL MP(MD) No.4084 of 2016 IN CRL A(MD) No.440 of 2006

¶6

KRISHNAN ... PETITIONER/APPELLANT

¶7

¶8

STATE THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KULITHALAI POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT. (CRIME NO. 130/2003) ... RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

¶9

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to dispense with the personal appearance of the petitioner on the basis of the order imposed by this Honourable High Court in M.P.No. 1 of 2006 in Crl.A.No. 440 of 2006 in S.C.No. 75/2005 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Kulithalai for a period of 6 months and pass such any or other orders.

¶10

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S V.KANNAN, Advocate for the petitioner and of MRS.S.PRABHA Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶11

While granting appeal bail on 31.10.2006 under Section 389 Cr.P.C., this Court directed the petitioner to appear before the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Kulithalai once in a month till the disposal of the appeal. He has appeared for a long period. Of course, subsequently, he has slipped because he has slept in a hospital due to some misfortune ie. injured in a road accident. That is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶12

2.We do not want to make a research into that. Because, the Criminal Appeal is pending. A learned counsel is also prosecuting the appeal. There is no allegation that the petitioner will flee away from justice. His compliance for a longer period is sufficient. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

3.In the circumstances, the condition for his appearance before the said Court is lifted. However, as when so directed by this Court, he shall appear.

¶14

4.Accordingly, this petition is disposed of.

sd/-

03/06/2016

/ TRUE COPY /

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶19

¶20

1.THE ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE, KULITHALAI.

¶21

2.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KULITHALAI POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT.

¶22

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

¶23

GJM/ARK/PV/SAR-III-9.6.16-2P-4C

¶24

ORDER

¶25

IN CRL MP(MD) No.4084 of 2016 IN

¶26

CRL A(MD) No.440 of 2006 Date :03/06/2016

¶27

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

Krishnan v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnan 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

Dharmaraj Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Sivamani Vs the Inspector of Police

K. Murugan Vs the Director

K.S.Krishnamurthy Vs the Inspector of Police

B.Thirumathy @ Moorthy Vs the Inspector of Police

S. Narayanamoorthy Vs the Inspector of Police