Disposed

R.Sathyanathan v. P.Pushpanathan

Madras HC20 Dec 2018CRL MP/16276/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court suspended litigation pending revision on the condition that the petitioner maintain bail for a sum of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and appear monthly pending the outcome of the substantive revision.

What did the court decide?

Suspension of the substantive sentence; enlargement on bail with conditions including maintaining a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and monthly appearance.

R.Sathyanathan Vs P.Pushpanathan — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Thursday, the Twentieth day of December Two Thousand Eighteen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice V. PARTHIBAN

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.16276 of 2018

¶7

IN CRL RC.1399/2018

¶8

R.SATHYANATHAN [ PETITIONER ]

¶9

¶10

P.PUSHPANATHAN [ RESPONDENT ]

¶11

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the Memorandum of Grounds in Criminal Revision Case No. on the file of the High Court, the High Court will be pleased to suspend the sentence passed against the petitioner in the judgement of the learned Judicial Magistrate, FTC No-1, Erode dt 01.02.2016 in STC No.249 of 2014 and confirmed by the I Addl Dt.and Sess. Judge, Erode by an order dt 24.11.2016 in C.A.36/2016

¶12

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the Memorandum of Grounds in Crl.Revision Case No. on the file of the High Court and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.V.MEENAKSHISUNDARAM Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.C.S.SARAVANAN Advocate on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶13

This miscellaneous petition has been filed to suspend the sentence passed against the petitioner by order dated 01.02.2016 in S.T.C.No.249 of 2014, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.1, Erode and confirmed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Erode, by judgment dated 24.11.2016 in C.A.No.36 of 2016, pending disposal of the revision.

¶14

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, a memo has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, stating that he has paid an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- to the respondent. The said fact has also been acknowledged by the learned counsel for the respondent. The memo dated 20.12.2018, is hereby recorded and taken on file.

¶15

3. In view of the settlement of the amount vide memo dated 20.12.2018, the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone is suspended and the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a

¶16

like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.1, Erode and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the said Court on the first working day of every month at 10.30 a.m. pending revision.

¶17

-sd/20/12/2018

¶18

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

¶19

TRUE COPY

¶20

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.)
High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
FAST TRACK COURT NO.I, ERODE
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
ERODE[FOR INFORMATION]
3 THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE,ERODE
4 THE SUPERINTENDENT
CENTRAL PRISON, COIMBATORE
+1 C.C. to M/S.V.MEENAKSHISUNDARAM Advocate on payment of
necessary charges SR.NO. 24535

¶21

Order

¶22

in CRL MP.16276/2018 in CRL RC.1399/2018 Date :20/12/2018

¶23

From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format RD 20/12/2018

¶24

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

R.Sathyanathan v. P.Pushpanathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Sathyanathan v. P.Pushpanathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Seetharaman @ Mani Vs State Represented by

S.Arul Prakasam Vs v.Jayapal

K.S.Mohamed Rafic Vs the State Rep. by

R.Sathyanathan Vs P.Pushpanathan

Karnan Vs Sumathi

Prasanth Vs the Inspector of Police