Ramalingam v. the Inspector of Police
Case brief
What is this about?
The court recalled anticipatory bail because it was granted on a false premise that the victim was discharged from the hospital, when one victim had actually died. The petitioner charged withmurder sought modification but failed to disclose the fatality, leading to dismissal.
What did the court decide?
Recall of the anticipatory bail order dated 11.11.2016 made in CRL.OP(MD) No.21515 of 2016.
What the court decided
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Tuesday, the Third day of January Two Thousand Seventeen
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr Justice S.VAIDYANATHAN
CRL MP(MD) No.12076 of 2016 and CRL OP(MD) No.21515 of 2016
CRL MP(MD) No.12076 of 2016 in CRL OP(MD) No.21515 of 2016:-
RAMALINGAM ... PETITIONER/2ND PETITIONER
Vs THE STATE REP.BY , THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PERAIYUR POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT CRIME NO.93 OF 2016 ... RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT
Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to modify the condition to the effect that the petitioner shall appear before the Anna Nagar Police Station, Madurai instead of singning before the respondent police in Crl.OP(MD) No.21515 of 2016 dated 11.11.2016
CRL OP(MD) No.21515 of 2016:-
1 MURUGESAN 2 RAMALINGAM ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 1 & 2
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be recalled given that one victim died and the relief sought was misrepresenting the victim's status.
Whether a High Court order granted basis on a false premise regarding a victim's condition can be recalled suo motu.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
RAMALINGAM
- respondent
THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
Coram
S. VAIDYANATHAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court