Dismissed

D.Murugavel, (M/a 45 Yrs) v. State Rep by

Madras HC19 Apr 2017CRL OP/7270/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On an application for anticipatory bail in a pending criminal case where a non-bailable warrant had been issued, the Court refused grant of bail and directed the petitioner to surrender and approach the trial court for recall of the warrant.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail denied; petitioner directed to appear before concerned court and file application to recall NBW for immediate consideration.

D.Murugavel, (M/a 45 Yrs) Vs State Rep by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Wednesday, the Nineteenth day of April Two Thousand Seventeen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice S. BASKARAN

¶6

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.7270 of 2017

¶7

¶8

P.R.C.NO. [*]45 OF 2015

¶9

[*]before the Judicial Magistrate, Sirkazhi]

¶10

D.MURUGAVEL

¶11

[ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

¶12

¶13

STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SIRKALI POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT. CR.NO.322/2015.

¶14

For Petitioner : M/S.R.VIVEKANANTHAN Advocate

¶15

For Respondent : MR. R.SEKAR, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶16

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

¶17

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶18

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 147, 148, 341, 342, 294(b), 506(ii) & 302 of IPC, r/w Section 3(1) of TNP (PD&L) has filed the above petition seeking anticipatory bail, stating that in the said case, charge sheet has been filed and the same has been taken on file in [*] P.R.C.No.45 of 2015.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had been shown as absconding accused in the above said case and also undertakes to appear before the court regularly for all the hearing dates and sought for anticipatory bail as he has been issued with Non bailable warrant.

¶20

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that the case is pending in [*]P.R.C.No.45 of 2015 before the Judicial Magistrate, Sirkazhi, and the petitioner may be directed to surrender before the concerned court and file petition to recall NBW.

¶21

Considering the fact that [*]P.R.C.No.45 of 2015 is pending before Judicial Magistrate, Sirkazhi this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the the petitioner. However, the petitioner is directed to appear before the court concerned and to file necessary application to recall NBW and on filing of such application, the same shall be considered and disposed of, by the Court concerned on the same day in accordance with law.

¶22

5.This petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶23

-sd/-

¶24

19/04/2017

¶25

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

¶26

TRUE COPY

¶27

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

¶28

[*]Amended Order as per order of this Court dated 28/06/2017 in CRL.MP.NO.7860 OF 2017 IN CRL.OP.NO.7270 OF 2017]

¶29

¶30

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.I, NAGAPATTINAM.

¶31

[*]2 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIRKAZHI.

¶32

3 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NAGAPATTINAM [FOR INFORMATION]

¶33

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶34

5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SIRKALI POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT.

¶35

+1CC to M/S.R.VIVEKANANTHAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR NO.11873

CRL OP.7270/2017

Date :19/04/2017

MK:24/04/2017

MK:05/07/2017

D.Murugavel, (M/a 45 Yrs) v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Murugavel, (M/a 45 Yrs) v. State Rep 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

M.Karthik, M/28 Years Vs State Represented by

D.R.K.Kalyanram, Aged 40 Years Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

Thirumalai Vasan, Aged 35 Yrs, Vs the State Rep. by Its

Pachiyappan, 61 Yrs, Vs Inspector of Police

R.Saravanakumar, Male Vs the Commissione of Police

C.Srinivasan, Aged 40 Yrs, Vs the Inspector of Police