Allowed

Mathew v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC19 Apr 2017CRL OP(MD)/4512/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench ordered anticipatory bail for the petitioner accused of offences under Section 438 Cr.P.C. and the TNP Act, conditioned upon executing a bond with sureties within 15 days and appearing daily at specified times.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon executing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and complying with conditions of daily appearance and submission before the Magistrate within 15 days.

Mathew Vs the Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

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

¶2

Wednesday, the Nineteenth day of April Two Thousand Seventeen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice J.NISHA BANU

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.4512 of 2017

¶6

MATHEW ... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN

¶7

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE STATE OF TAMIL NADU, PEW, TIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT CRIME NO. 101 OF 2015 ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT

¶8

For Petitioner : M/S. R. PONKARTHIKEYAN Advocate

¶9

For Respondent : M/S S.PRABHA, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶10

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

¶11

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶12

The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.101 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 4(1)(aaa), 4(1)(A) TNP Act and Section 120(b), 465, 468, 471 IPC r/w Sections 6 and 7 of TNRS Rules 2000 (Transport) and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court had already granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in Crl.O.P(MD) No.13636 of 2016, vide order dated 03.08.2016 on condition that the petitioner shall execute sureties within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. But the petitioner could not execute the sureties within the time prescribed by this Court. Hence, he has filed petitions for extension of time and the time limit fixed has been extended by this Court. However, the petitioner could not execute sureties within the extended time. Hence, he has come up with this petition for anticipatory bail. He further submitted that when the matter came up for hearing on 17.04.2017, this Court directed the petitioner to pay a sum of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Rs.1000/- in the account opened in the name of the Registrar (Administration), (for removal of Prosopis Juli Flora (Karuvelam

¶14

Trees), Savings Bank Account No.6514082295, Indian Bank, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai on or before 18.04.2017. He further submitted that the petitioner has complied with the said direction and cost memo has also been filed to that effect.

¶15

The learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) affirms the above said fact.

¶16

This Court heard the submissions made on either side and perused the order passed in Crl.O.P(MD)No.13636 of 2016, dated 03.08.2016.

¶17

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that this Court had already granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in Crl.O.P(MD)No.13636 of 2016, dated 03.08.2016, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶18

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thirumangalam and 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

¶19

7.The petitioner 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.

¶20

/ TRUE COPY /

¶21

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶22

¶23

THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUMANGALAM.

¶24

DO-THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI.

¶25

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, STATE OF TAMIL NADU,

¶26

PEW, TIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT

¶27

THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶28

MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶29

+1. CC to M/S. R. PONKARTHIKEYAN Advocate SR.No.20509 ORDER IN

¶30

CRL OP(MD) No.4512 of 2017

¶31

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Date :19/04/2017

¶32

MS/PM.PN/SAR.3/21.04.2017/2P.6C

Mathew v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mathew 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

J.Mohammed Asarudeen, Vs the Inspector of Police

P.Sekar, Vs the Inspector of Police

G.Radhakrishnan Vs the Inspector of Police

Vijayakumar, Vs the Inspector of Police

Venmani, Vs the Inspector of Police

Mohammed Rafeeq, Vs State Rep. by