Partly allowed

Ganesan v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC9 Mar 2018CRL MP(MD)/1806/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petition was filed to relax bail conditions imposed in a connected criminal proceeding. The court modified the existing condition to require the petitioners to appear at the police station daily until further orders, noting that the charge sheet was not yet filed.

What did the court decide?

The condition in Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 1111 of 2018 modified to require petitioners to appear at police daily at 10.30 am.

Ganesan Vs the Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

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

¶2

Friday, the Ninth day of March Two Thousand Eighteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN

¶5

CRL MP(MD) No.1806 of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD) No.1111 of 2018

¶6

1 GANESAN 2 VETRISELVAN 3 VALLIAMMAL ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.2,3,6

¶7

Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE NALATTINPUDUR POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.

¶8

IN CRIME NO. 11/2018 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶9

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to relax the condition imposed in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.1111 of 2018 dated 09.02.2018

¶10

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

¶11

This Petition has been filed to relax the condition imposed in Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 1111 of 2018, dated 09.02.2018.

¶12

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

¶13

3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State submitted that the petitioners herein are complying with the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ condition regularly, without any deviation and he further submitted

¶14

that the charge sheet is not yet filed.

¶15

4.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), the condition already imposed on the petitioners in Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 1111 of 2018, dated 09.02.2018 is modified to the extent that the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am until further orders.

sd/-

09/03/2018

/ TRUE COPY /

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

¶20

¶21

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, KOVILPATTI, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT

¶22

2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT

¶23

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE NALATTINPUDUR POLICE STATION,

¶24

THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT

¶25

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

¶26

5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SOUTH POLICE STATION, VELLORE

¶27

+1. C.C. to M/S.M.MARIA VINOLA Advocate SR.No.3829 GJM/PN/SAR-2-14.3.18-2P-7C

¶28

ORDER IN CRL MP(MD) No.1806 of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD) No.1111 of 2018 Date :09/03/2018

¶29

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

Ganesan v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesan 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

Ramesh @ Ramesh Pandi Vs the Inspector of Police

Ramesh @ Ramesh Pandi, Vs the Inspector of Police

Ammasi @ Sekar Vs the Inspector of Police

V. Nagaraj Vs the Inspector of Police

Karthickumar, Vs the Inspector of Police

M.S.Pandi Vs the Inspector of Police