Allowed

Umadevi v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC10 Apr 2017CRL OP(MD)/3657/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to petitioners charged in two cases involving attempted cheating. The court observed they are not directly involved in the offence, allowing their release on bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with bond of Rs. 10,000 each for two sureties; appearance before police and Magistrate; dismissal if absent for 15 days.

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

¶1

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

¶2

Monday, the Tenth day of April Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT

¶3

The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice J.NISHA BANU

¶4

CRL OP(MD) No.3657 AND 3768 of 2017

¶5

1 UMADEVI 2 D.NITHYASREE 3 D.JAI GANESH ... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NOS:2,3&4 IN CRL OP(MD) No.3657 of 2017 1 M.SRIDHARAN 2 S.NAGESWARI ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN IN CRL OP(MD) No.3768 of 2017 Vs STATE BY ITS THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SAMAYANALLUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT CRIME NO.369 OF 2016 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT IN BOTH THE PETITIONS S.R.KANNAPPAN ... PETITIONER/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IN BOTH THE PETITIONS

¶6

For Petitioner : M/S.M.JEGADEESH PANDIAN Advocate, IN

¶7

BOTH THE PETITIONS

¶8

For Respondent : M/S.S.PRABHA, Government Advocate(Criminal Side), IN BOTH THE PETITIONS

¶9

For Intervenor : M/S.T.LAJAPATHI ROY, Advocate IN BOTH THE PETITIONS

¶10

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

¶11

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

The petitioners, who are arrayed as accused in Crime No.369 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable

¶13

under Sections 406, 465, 420, 294(b) and 506(i) IPC and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

¶14

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent/State and the learned counsel appearing for the intervenor.

¶15

The case of the prosecution is that one Sundaramoorthy took money from the shop of the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.17,62,267/- and he agreed to return the said amount within 15 days and he failed to fullfil his promise.

¶16

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the defacto complainant made false allegation against one Sundaramoorthy, who was working under her and due to false allegations, the said Sundaramoorthy committed suicide and the first petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.3657 of 2017 is the sister of the said Sundaramoorthy and the second and third petitioners are the children of the first petitioner and they have no direct nexus in the alleged offence.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai, and on each of them 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 petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. The petitioners shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

¶18

6.The petitioners shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

¶19

/ TRUE COPY /

¶20

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

¶21

¶22

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO IV

¶23

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

¶24

2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT

¶25

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SAMAYANALLUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT

¶26

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

¶27

+2. CC to M/S.M.JEGADEESH PANDIAN Advocate SR.No.20044, 20043 +2 cc to M/R.T.LAJAPATHI ROY, Advocate, SR.NO:19947,19948

¶28

SVA/BS/13.04.2017/SAR4/3P/9C

¶29

CRL OP(MD) No.3657 AND 3768 of 2017

¶30

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

Umadevi v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umadevi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V. Parthiban Vs the Inspector of Police

R.Saravanan, Vs the State Rep. by the Deputy

Mrs.Sobana Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Immanuel, Vs the Inspector of Police

Sheik Abdul Kadar @ Sanjai, Vs the Inspector of Police

Ragavendra Prakash Vs the Inspector of Police