Allowed

Ramesh, M/Aged About 40 Yrs, v. State Rep. by Inspector of

Madras HC11 May 2017CRL OP/9195/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court modified an earlier order dismissing a petition for anticipatory bail. Recognizing a case was registered and co-accused had received bail, the court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for offences under Sections 392 & 397 IPC, subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted in Cr.No.566 of 2012 for offences under Sections 392 & 397 IPC on bond with sureties and conditions to appear for interrogation.

Ramesh, M/Aged About 40 Yrs, Vs State Rep. by Inspector of — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Wednesday, the Seventh day of June Two Thousand Seventeen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.S. RAMESH

¶6

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.9195 of 2017

¶7

RAMESH,

¶8

[ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

¶9

¶10

STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE [ RESPONDENT ] PALLIKONDA POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT.

¶11

For Petitioner : M/S.E.KANNADASAN Advocate

¶12

For Respondent : MR. P. MUTHU KUMAR, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶13

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

¶14

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶15

By order dated 11.05.2017, the present petition was dismissed on the ground that there was neither a case nor a petition against the petitioner. Today, the matter is listed under the caption “for being mentioned”.

¶16

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a case has already been registered against the petitioner in Cr.No.566 of 2012, for which he has filed the present petition for anticipatory bail.

¶17

3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) also concedes with the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. He further submitted that co-accused were also granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶18

4.Considering the submission made on either side, the order of this Court dated 11.05.2017 is modified to the effect that the petitioner is granted the relief of anticipatory bail in Cr.No.566 of 2012 for the offence punishbale under Sections 392 & 397 IPC.

¶19

5.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Magistrate concerned within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, on his 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 Judicial Magistrate No.V, Vellore or to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

¶20

-sd/-

¶21

07/06/2017

¶22

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

¶23

TRUE COPY

¶24

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

¶25

¶26

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.V, VELLORE

¶27

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VELLORE (FOR INFORMATION)

¶28

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶29

4 STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALLIKONDA POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT.

¶30

+1 CC to M/S.E.KANNADASAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges Sr.No.10026

¶31

CRL OP.9195/2017

¶32

Date :07/06/2017 MD: 08/06/2017

Ramesh, M/Aged About 40 Yrs, v. State Rep. by Inspector of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh, M/Aged About 40 Yrs, v. State Rep. by Inspector of

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

Jayapal, M/30 Years Vs State Rep.by

S.Sreekanth, Vs Jayakumar

Surendira Babu, Aged 35 Yrs Vs the Station House Officer

Ashik, M/AGE-31 Years Vs State Represented by Its

T. S. Rajamani, 65 Yrs, Vs Police E1 Police Station

Smt.Jebamani, F/A-40 Years Vs the State Rep.by Its