Allowed

Anand, 24 Yrs, v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC28 Aug 2017CRL MP/10572/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Madras, in a criminal miscellaneous petition, accepted the petitioner's inability to furnish sureties of Rs.10,000/- and modified the bail condition to require sureties of Rs.5,000/- each.

What did the court decide?

Condition No.(i) of the bail order dated 13.06.2017 is modified to require a bond of Rs.5,000/- with two sureties each for a like sum.

Anand, 24 Yrs, Vs the Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Monday, the Twenty Eighth day of August Two Thousand Seventeen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice S. BASKARAN

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.10572 of 2017

¶7

[*]IN CRL OP.10356/2017

¶8

ANAND, [ PETITIONER ]

¶9

¶10

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, [ RESPONDENT ] K-10, KOYAMBEDU POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

¶11

[*]CR.NO. 1054 OF 2017.

¶12

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein the High Court will be pleased to modify the condition to execute two sureties each an sum of Rs. 5,000/-instead of execute two sureties each a sum of Rs. 10000/- order passed in [*]Crl.O.P. No.10356 of 2017 dated 13.06.2017 on the file of this Honble Court and thus.

¶13

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.K.THENRAJAN Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.MUTHU KUMAR, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶14

This petition has been filed praying to modify the condition to execute two sureties each a sum of Rs.5,000/- instead of execute two sureties each a sum of Rs.10,000/- order passed in [*] Crl.Op.No.10356 of 2017 dated 13.06.2017.

¶15

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶16

3.In paragraph 5 of the affidavit, it is stated as under:-

¶17

¶18

5.The petitioner submit that he was detained under goondas and moreover he was in more than one year in Judicial Custody, he could not able to arrange the sureties to the value a sum of RS.10,000/- and his relatives are poor persons, thay are ready to furnish sureties to him if the surety value is modified as RS.5,000/Even after getting bail order, the petitioner could not able to come out from prison because of the above reason.

¶19

4.Considering the above submission made, the condition No.(i)of the order dated 13.06.2017 is modified as under:-

¶20

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.5,000/[Rupees Five Thousand Only) with two sureties each for a likesum to the satisfaction of the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai.

¶21

5.Hence, this petition is ordered accordingly.

¶22

-sd/-

¶23

28/08/2017

¶24

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶25

TRUE COPY

¶26

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶27

¶28

1 THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, NO.V, EGMORE, CHENNAI.

¶29

2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI. [FOR INFORMATION]

¶30

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶31

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, K-10, KOYAMBEDU POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

¶32

+1 C.C. to M/S.K.THENRAJAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO. 18533

¶33

Order

¶34

in CRL MP.10572/2017

¶35

¶36

[*] CRL OP.10356/2017

¶37

Date :28/08/2017

¶38

From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format ths : 01.09.2017 RD 26/09/2017

Anand, 24 Yrs, v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand, 24 Yrs, 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

D.Raghu Vs the Inspector of Police

P.Appavavoo Vs the Commissionr Hindu

R.Srinivasan Vs T.N.Loganathan

N. Bagyalakshmi Vs S. Arokiaswamy

Anand, M/A-24 Years Vs the Inspector of Police

S.P.Tamilarasan Vs the Inspector of Police