Allowed

Veerasamy v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Madras HC12 Aug 2016CRL OP(MD)/14651/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the sole accused petitioner Veerasamy in an NLRC matter involving Sections 294(b), 324, and 506 of the IPC, treating the offence as a bailable offence and directing the police to send a compliance report.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on execution of bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of daily reporting and no tampering.

Veerasamy Vs the Sub Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Friday, the Twelfth day of August Two Thousand Sixteen

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.14651 of 2016

¶7

VEERASAMY ..PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED

¶8

Vs.

¶9

STATE REP.BY

¶10

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE AMATHUR POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT. IN CRIME NO.181/2016 ..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶11

For Petitioner : M/S.S.AROKIYA SELVA RAMESH Advocate

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.P.KANNITHEVAN, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶13

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

¶14

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶15

The petitioner, who is arrayed as sole accused, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) I.P.C., in Crime No.181 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶16

2.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence and prays for anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner.

¶17

3.It is submitted by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that the injured person had already been discharged from the hospital.

¶18

4.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the injured person had already been discharged from the hospital, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar, on condition that https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the

¶19

¶20

satisfaction of the respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

¶21

(i) the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

¶22

(ii) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. (iii) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶23

(iv) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

¶24

5.The Inspector of Police concerned is directed to send a compliance report to the office of the learned Government Advocate, as to whether the petitioner is complying with the conditions or not.

¶25

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶26

¶27

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, VIRUDHUNAGAR.

¶28

2 -do-thro'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUDHUNAGAR AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR.

¶29

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

¶30

4 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AMATHUR POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

¶31

+1. CC to M/S.S.AROKIYA SELVA RAMESH Advocate SR.No.44481

¶32

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14651 of 2016 Date :12/08/2016 PBK/PV-MPA/SAR-III 18/08/2016 ::2P-6C::

¶33

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

Veerasamy v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veerasamy v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Heeralal, Vs the Inspector of Police

S.Jayabalan Vs the Inspector of Police

P.v.Natarajan Vs the Inspector of Police

Vinoth Kumar Vs the Inspector of Police

Rajeswari Vs the Inspector of Police

Muniyappan Vs the Inspector of Police