Allowed

M.Iqbal@Muniyasamy v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC8 Nov 2017CRL MP(MD)/10089/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This heark is a criminal miscellaneous petition for relaxation of bail conditions. The petitioner had complied with initial bail conditions for 25 days. The Court allowed relaxation, modifying the requirement to appear before the police once a week on Mondays.

What did the court decide?

Modification of bail condition to require appearance before police once a week on every Monday at 10.30 a.m.

M.Iqbal@Muniyasamy Vs the Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

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

¶2

Wednesday, the Eighth day of November Two Thousand Seventeen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

CRL MP(MD) No.10089 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) No.13277 of 2017

¶6

M.IQBAL@MUNIYASAMY ... PETITIONER / PETITIONER

¶7

¶8

THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE MUTHAIAHPURAM POLICE STATION, MUTHAIAHPURAM,TUTICORIN DISTRICT.

¶9

CRIME. NO.288/2017 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

¶10

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to relax the condition imposed by this Honourable Court order made in Crl.O.P(MD).No13277/2017 dated 28/09/2017 on the file of this Honourable Court.

¶11

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

¶12

The Petitioner filed this relaxation petition after complying the condition imposed by this Court before the respondent Police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 307 and 506(ii) of I.P.C in Crime No.288 of 2017.

¶13

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶14

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

¶15

3.The Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the

¶16

respondent Police submitted that the petitioner is regularly complying with the conditions imposed by this Court for a period of 25 days.

¶17

4.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the condition already imposed on the petitioner is modified to the effect that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police, once in a week i.e., on every Monday at 10.30 a.m, until further orders.

sd/-

08/11/2017

/ TRUE COPY /

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

¶22

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶23

Madurai - 625 023.

¶24

¶25

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, TUTICORIN.

¶26

2 -DO- THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TUTICORIN DISTRICT.

¶27

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE MUTHAIAHPURAM POLICE STATION, MUTHAIAHPURAM, TUTICORIN DISTRICT.

¶28

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH Court,MADURAI.

¶29

+1. C.C. to M/S.P.BANUPRASATH Advocate SR.No.34165

¶30

ORDER

¶31

¶32

CRL MP(MD) No.10089 of 2017

¶33

¶34

CRL OP(MD) No.13277 of 2017

¶35

Date :08/11/2017

¶36

MV:SM:SAR3:13/11/2017/2P/6C

¶37

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

M.Iqbal@Muniyasamy v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Iqbal@Muniyasamy 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

Al Amin Vs Dr.Agnes

M. Shanmugaiya Alias Vs the Inspector of Police

Kannan Vs the Inspector of Police

Sekar Vs the Inspector of Police

Moorthi Vs the Inspector of Police

Gopal Vs the Inspector of Police