Disposed

Meenatchi @ Meena v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC22 Aug 2016CRL MP(MD)/6587/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought to modify bail conditions imposed in an earlier order. The court modified the condition requiring daily appearance at Dindigul to appearance at Kodaikanal Town Police Station for one week, considering the petitioners' residence in Kodaikanal.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners ordered to appear at Kodaikanal Town Police Station daily at 10.00 am for one week; thereafter appear as required.

Meenatchi @ Meena Vs the Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

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

¶3

Monday, the Twenty Second day of August Two Thousand Sixteen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI

¶6

CRL MP(MD) No.6587 of 2016 IN CRL OP(MD) No.12347 of 2016

¶7

1 MEENATCHI @ MEENA 2 BALAMURALI KRISHNAN 3 VINAYAGA MURTHY 4 RAMASAMY 5 VIJAYASARATHY ...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No.1 to 4 & 6 Vs

¶8

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH DINDIGUL DISTRICT CRIME NO.16 OF 2016 ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶9

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to modify the condition imposed in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12347 of 2016 dated 21.7.2016.

¶10

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

¶11

This petition is filed to modify the condition imposed by this Court in Crl.O.P(MD).No.12347 of 2016, dated 21.07.2016.

¶12

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are residing at Koungi Village in Kodaikanal Taluk and hence, it is very difficult for them to appear before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 am until further orders.

¶13

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that the petitioners are complying with the condition regularly.

¶14

Considering the above submission, the condition already imposed by this Court is modified to the effect that petitioners shall appear before the Kodaikanal Town Police Station daily at 10.00 am for a period of one week and thereafter, appear before the respondent Police as and when required for interrogation.

sd/-

22/08/2016

/ TRUE COPY /

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

¶19

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

¶20

¶21

¶22

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, DINDIGUL.

¶23

2 -do-thro'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,DINDIGUL.

¶24

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

¶25

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

¶26

5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KODAIKANAL TOWN POLICE STATION, KODAIKANAL, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

¶27

+1. C.C. to M/S.P.MUTHUVIJAYAPANDIAN Advocate SR.No.46300

¶28

ORDER IN CRL MP(MD) No.6587 of 2016 IN CRL OP(MD) No.12347 of 2016 Date :22/08/2016 PBK/SK-SKN/SAR-I 26/08/2016 ::2P-7C::

¶29

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

Meenatchi @ Meena v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meenatchi @ Meena 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Muthupandi Vs the Inspector of Police

Jeyaraman Vs the Inspector of Police

Murugan Vs the Inspector of Police

Murugan Vs the Inspector of Police

S.Authithiya Pandian Vs the Inspector of Police

Seenivasan Vs the Inspector of Police