Dismissed

Thirumalai Ganesan v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC27 Oct 2017CRL MP(MD)/9586/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition sought modification of bail conditions regarding a monetary deposit of Rs.1,05,000/- previously ordered. The respondent submitted that the petitioner was not complying with the conditions. The Court dismissed the petition, declining to modify the existing condition.

What did the court decide?

No; the petition to modify the bail condition regarding the monetary deposit was dismissed.

Thirumalai Ganesan Vs the Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Seventh day of October Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶2

CRL MP(MD) No.9586 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) No.13489 of 2017

¶3

THIRUMALAI GANESAN ... PETITIONER/ 1^st PETITIONER Vs

¶4

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VASUDEVANALLUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT, CRIME NO. 235/2017. ... RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT

¶5

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to modify the condition with regard to be deposit and disbursement of Rs. 1,05,000/- in CRL. O. P. (MD) No. 13489/2017 dated 05.10.2017.

¶6

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

¶7

The Petitioner filed this modification petition to modify the condition with regard to the deposit and disbursement of Rs.1,05,000/- in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13489 of 2017, dated 05.10.2017.

¶8

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶9

3.The Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police submitted that the petitioner is not complying with the conditions imposed by this Court.

¶10

3.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), I am not inclined to modify the condition imposed this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13489 of 2017 dated 05.10.2017. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

¶11

/ TRUE COPY /

¶12

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

¶13

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶14

¶15

THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGIRI.

¶16

DO-THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI.

¶17

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VASUDEVANALLUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

¶18

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

¶19

+1. C.C. to M/S.R.RAMASAMY Advocate SR.No.33388

¶20

MS/PM-PN/SAR.1/02.11.2017/2P.6C

¶21

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

Thirumalai Ganesan v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thirumalai Ganesan 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

M. Sanmugavel Vs the Inspector of Police

Shahul Hameed Vs the Inspector of Police

T.Ambica Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

K.Vijayakumar Vs Muniyasamy

Syed Ibrahim Vs the Inspector of Police

S.Alexander Vs the Inspector of Police