Allowed

Palaniammal, M/40 v. the State Rep.by

Madras HC17 Apr 2017CRL MP(MD)/3047/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought relaxation of bail conditions imposed by the High Court on 23/02/2017. The court heard arguments from the Government Advocate, who stated the petitioners were complying with conditions. The court allowed the prayer, relaxing bail conditions while mandating appearance for interrogation when required.

What did the court decide?

Bail conditions imposed on the petitioners by order dated 23/02/2017 were relaxed with a direction to appear for interrogation when required.

Palaniammal, M/40 Vs the State Rep.by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

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

¶2

Monday, the Seventeenth day of April Two Thousand Seventeen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice J.NISHA BANU

¶5

CRL MP(MD) Nos.3047 & 3048 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) Nos.1934 & 1933 of 2017

¶6

PALANIAMMAL, ... PETITIONER/PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.3

¶7

R.GURUSAMY ... PETITIONER/PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.4

¶8

THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VEERAPANDI POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT (CRIME NO.131/2016) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT IN BOTH THE PETITIONS

¶9

Prayer in CRL MP(MD). 3047/ 2017 in CRL OP(MD) No.1934 of 2017 : Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to pass an order relaxing the bail condition imposed on the petitioners by this Honourable Court made in Crl.O.P(MD).No.1934/2017 dated 23/02/2017 forthwith.

¶10

Prayer in CRL MP(MD). 3048/ 2017 in CRL OP(MD) No.1933 of 2017 :: To pass an order relaxing the bail condition imposed on the petitioners by this Honourable Court made in Crl.O.P(MD). No.1933/2017 dated 23/02/2017 forthwith.

¶11

Order : These petitions coming on for orders upon perusing the petitions filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.M.JEGADEESAN, Advocate for the petitioner in both the petitions and of MRS.S.PRABHA, Government Advocate (Crl.side) on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶12

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent.

¶13

According to the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), the petitioners are complying with the condition imposed by this Court regularly.

¶14

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

¶15

Considering the above submission, the condition imposed on

¶16

the petitioners are relaxed. However, the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

¶17

/ TRUE COPY /

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THENI.

¶21

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THENI DISTRICT 3 THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VEERAPANDI POLICE STATION, THENI DIST.

¶22

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. C.C. to M/S.M.JEGADEESAN Advocate SR.No.20278 ORDER IN CRL MP(MD) Nos.3047 & 3048 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) Nos.1934 & 1933 of 2017 Date :17/04/2017

¶23

SMA/CM-MSA/SAR-3/19.04.2017:2P/6C

¶24

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

Palaniammal, M/40 v. the State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Palaniammal, M/40 v. the State Rep.by

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

Umadevi Vs the Inspector of Police

Immanuel, Vs the Inspector of Police

Sheik Abdul Kadar @ Sanjai, Vs the Inspector of Police

Sivabalan Vs the Inspector of Police

Arockiya Amalraj Vs the Inspector of Police

A.Suresh Vs the Inspector of Police