Disposed

S.Thirumalaisamy, v. State Rep. by

Madras HC12 Dec 2016CRL OP/26473/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court, via a Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., directed the Principal Sessions Judge, Erode, to consider the petitioner's bail application in a case under the SC/ST Atrocities Act. The court noted that anticipatory bail is not maintainable under the Act but issued directions to expedite the hearing on the day of surrender.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Principal Sessions Judge, Erode, to consider the petitioner's bail application in Crime No.220 of 2016 preferably on the same day of surrender after issuing notice to the Respondent.

S.Thirumalaisamy, Vs State Rep. by — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated :12.12.2016

¶3

Coram

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.26473 of 2016

¶6

S.Thirumalaisamy ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs. State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Erode Taluk Police Station, Erode District. (Crime No.220 of 2016) ... Respondent Prayer : Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to direct the Principal Sessions Judge, Erode to consider the Bail Application of the Petitioner herein in Crime No.220 of 2016 on the file of the Respondent Police, on the same day of surrender.

¶8

For Petitioner : No appearance
For Respondent : Mr.C.Emalias
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER

¶9

Mr.C.Emalias, Learned Additional Public Prosecutor takes notice for the Respondent.

¶10

2.According to the Petitioner, a case was registered under Sections 147, 323, 294(b), 506(1) & 342 I.P.C. r/w. Section 3(1) (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 1989.

¶11

3.It is averred in the Petition that the Petitioner would surrender before the Learned Principal Sessions Judge, Erode and seek an order of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶12

4.It is to be noted that the relief of 'Anticipatory Bail' is not maintainable under Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 1989.

¶13

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

¶14

5.Considering the limited relief sought for by the Petitioner in the present Petition viz., passing of an Order in directing the Learned Principal Sessions Judge, Erode to consider his bail application in Crime No.220 of 2016 on the file of the Respondent Police, this Court, to prevent an aberration of Justice and to promote substantial cause of Justice, directs the Learned Principal Sessions Judge, Erode to consider the bail application of the Petitioner in Crime No.220 of 2016 preferably on the same day (of course, after issuing notice to the Respondent/Prosecuting Agency) and to pass necessary orders on merits and in the manner known to Law and in accordance with Law.

¶15

6.With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

¶16

Sd/
Assistant Registrar
/True copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Principal Sessions Judge,
Erode.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Erode Taluk Police Station,
Erode District.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.

¶17

Crl.O.P.No.26473 of 2016 SDR 29.12.2016

¶18

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

S.Thirumalaisamy, v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Thirumalaisamy, v. State Rep. by

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

M/S.New Kruba Jeweller Vs v.Kanchaa

P.Velmurugan, 20/M Vs the State Rep. by

A.Raja @ Rajkumar, Aged 28 Vs the State Rep. by Its

Dhayalan Aged 33 Yrs Vs the Inspector of Police

Dhayalan Aged 33 Yrs Vs the Inspector of Police

A.Felix Raj, Aged 37 Years, Vs the Inspector of Police