Allowed

Jayanthi @ K.Vaijaithimala v. State Represented by

Madras HC19 Jan 2017CRL OP/36/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Madras High Court granted bail to the petitioner, an accused in kidnapping for ransom, imposing conditions to submit a bond, place sureties, and report daily to the Magistrate until further orders.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail in the event of arrest, required to execute a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and report daily at 10.30 a.m.

Jayanthi @ K.Vaijaithimala Vs State Represented by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Thursday, the Nineteenth day of January Two Thousand Seventeen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Ms. Justice R.MALA

¶6

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.36 of 2017

¶7

JAYANTHI @ K.VAIJAITHIMALA [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

¶8

¶9

STATE REPRESENTED BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVALAM POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT. CR.NO.261 OF 2016.

¶10

For Petitioner : M/S.D.RAJAGOPAL Advocate

¶11

For Respondent : MR. B. RAMESH BABU, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶12

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

¶13

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶14

The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 343,364A I.P.C in Crime No.261 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police and hence, prays for anticipatory bail.

¶15

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the

¶16

petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the earlier anticipatory bail petition was dismissed by this Court on 23.11.2016. Investigation is considerably over and hence, he prays for anticipatory bail.

¶17

The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) would submit that the case has been registered against the petitioner, who along with the other accused abducted the defacto complainant for ransom. He would further submit that investigation is over and hence, he prays for dismissal of the application.

¶18

Considering the rival submissions made by both sides and also considering the fact that even though the petitioner was not arrested, neither he interfered with the investigation nor absconded from the jurisdiction, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions.

¶19

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Katpadi, Vellore District and on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the Court concerned daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

¶20

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate

¶21

within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed.

¶22

-sd/-

¶23

19/01/2017

¶24

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶25

TRUE COPY

¶26

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶27

¶28

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KATPADI, VELLORE DISTRICT.

¶29

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VELLORE DISTRICT.[FOR INFORMATION]

¶30

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶31

HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶32

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVALAM POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT.

¶33

+1CC to M/S.D.RAJAGOPAL Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR. NO. 1297

¶34

EGR 23/01/2017

Jayanthi @ K.Vaijaithimala v. State Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayanthi @ K.Vaijaithimala v. State Represented by

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

V. Venkatesh Vs N. Venkatesh

C.P.Jagatchirpian Vs Lalitha

S.Gopinathan Vs a.J.Devarajan

M.Ravi M/a 38 Years Vs the State by Its

G.Ramachandran Aged 27 Yrs Vs the Inspector of Police

G.Mohamed Nazeer Aged 28 Yrs Vs the Inspector of Police