Partly allowed

N.Ravikumaran, v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC12 Mar 2018CRL MP(MD)/1466/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought relaxation of bail conditions imposed in an earlier order. The Government Advocate submitted that the petitioner was abiding by conditions and investigation was pending. The court modified the requirement for weekly police appearance.

What did the court decide?

Condition to appear before police once a week on Mondays modified; earlier condition relaxed to this extent.

N.Ravikumaran, Vs the Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

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

¶2

Monday, the Twelfth day of March Two Thousand Eighteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN

¶5

CRL MP(MD) No.1466 of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD) No.2039 of 2018

¶6

N.RAVIKUMARAN ... PETITIONER/PETITIONER

¶7

THE STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SUSINDRUM POLICE STATION, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT (CRIME NO.58 OF 2018) ... RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

¶8

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court may be pleased to relax the condition imposed by this Honourable Court order made in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2039 of 2018, dated 09.02.2018 on the file of this Honourable Court and thus render justice.

¶9

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.K.KULANTHAI VIKRAM, Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.K.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI, Government Advocate (Crl.side) on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶10

This petition has been filed to relax the condition imposed in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2039 of 2018, dated 09.02.2018.

¶11

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶12

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the State submitted that the petitioner is abiding the condition from 16.02.2018 without any deviation. Further he added that the investigation is not yet completed.

¶13

Considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) that the petitioner is abiding the condition without any deviation and the investigation is not yet https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ completed, hence, the earlier condition imposed on the petitioner is modified to the extent that the petitioner shall appear before the

¶14

respondent police once in a week, i.e., on every Monday, at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

¶15

Accordingly, this petition is ordered.

¶16

sd/12/03/2018 / TRUE COPY /

¶17

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

¶18

¶19

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.III, NAGERCOIL. 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT AT NAGERCOIL. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SUSINDRUM POLICE STATION, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶20

+1. C.C. to M/S.K.KULANTHAI VICKRAM Advocate SR.No.3921

¶21

ORDER IN CRL MP(MD) No.1466 of 2018 IN

¶22

CRL OP(MD) No.2039 of 2018

¶23

Date :12/03/2018

¶24

MKV-MM-PN-SAR 3/15.3.2018/2P-6C

¶25

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

N.Ravikumaran, v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Ravikumaran, 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V. Nagaraj Vs the Inspector of Police

Karthickumar, Vs the Inspector of Police

Ganesan Vs the Inspector of Police

R. Vaithiyanathan Vs the Inspector of Police

Kandasamy Vs the Inspector of Police

Anantha Babu Vs the Inspector of Police