Disposed

M. Murugan v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC28 Nov 2017CRL MP(MD)/10794/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application to relax conditions relevant to an anticipatory bail order, the High Court accepted the submission that the petitioner was complying with existing conditions and ordered that the relaxed condition requires the petitioner to appear for every hearing.

What did the court decide?

Condition relaxed; petitioner directed to appear before lower court for every hearing.

M. Murugan Vs the Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

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

¶2

Tuesday, the Twenty Eighth day of November Two Thousand Seventeen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

CRL MP(MD) No.10794 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) No.13352 of 2017

¶6

M.MURUGAN ... PETITIONER/PETITIONER

¶7

¶8

STATE REP.BY ITS, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUCHULI POLICE STATION, THRUCHULI, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

¶9

CR NO. 289/2017. ... RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

¶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 on the Petitioners in Crl.O.P(MD) No. 13352/2017 dated 28.09.2017.

¶11

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

¶12

The Petitioner filed this petition for relaxing the condition imposed by this Court for the offences punishable under Sections 379 of IPC r/w. Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Act, 1957, in Crime No.289 of 2017, while granting anticipatory bail.

¶13

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶14

3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the State submitted that the petitioner is regularly complying with the conditions imposed by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13352 of 2017 dated 28.09.2017. He further submitted that after completion of investigation, a charge sheet has been filed before the lower Court.

¶15

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

¶16

4.Considering the above said facts, the condition is relaxed and the petitioner shall appear before the lower Court for each and every hearing. This petition is ordered accordingly.

¶17

/ TRUE COPY /

¶18

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶19

MRN

¶20

¶21

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ARUPPUKOTTAI, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT

¶22

2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUCHULI POLICE STATION, THIRUCHULI, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

¶23

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI

¶24

GJM/RR/SAR-3-6.12.2017-2P-5C

¶25

ORDER IN CRL MP(MD) No.10794 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) No.13352 of 2017 Date :28/11/2017

¶26

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

M. Murugan v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Murugan 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

Mr.N.Krishnakumar Vs R.Nakkeeran

Sekar Vs the Inspector of Police

Mani @ Paramadevar Vs the Inspector of Police

R. Esakkimuthu Vs the Inspector of Police

Senthil Vs the Inspector of Police

Nagoor Meeran Vs the Inspector of Police