Partly allowed

Perumal v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC13 Jun 2018CRL MP(MD)/4259/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

, The Madras High Court granted a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition seeking relaxation of bail conditions. The court modified a previous order, substituting the requirement to appear regularly with appearing only as and when required for interrogation by the police.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

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

¶1

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

¶2

Wednesday, the Thirteenth day of June Two Thousand Eighteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶5

CRL MP(MD) No.4259 of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD) No.7651 of 2018

¶6

PERUMAL

¶7

... PETITIONER/ PETITIONER

¶8

¶9

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALWARTHIRUNAGARI POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT. CRIME NO.61/2018

¶10

... RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT

¶11

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 on the petitioner in Crl.O.P(MD). No.7651/2018 order dated 09/05/2018.

¶12

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.D.SELVARAJ, Advocate for the petitioner and of Mr.A.P.G.OHM CHAIRMA PRABHU, Government Advocate(Crl.Side) on behalf of the Respondent, the court made the following order:-

¶13

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed to relax the condition imposed in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.7651 of 2018, dated 09.05.2018.

¶14

2.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) submitted that the petitioner is complying with the condition regularly.

¶15

3.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the condition already imposed on the petitioner is modified to the effect that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

¶16

sd/13/06/2018

¶17

/ TRUE COPY /

¶18

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

¶19

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Madurai - 625 023.

¶20

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

¶21

TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SRIVAIKUNDAM, TUTICORIN DISTRICT. 2. DO-THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TUTICORIN DISTRICT. 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALWARTHIRUNAGARI POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT. 4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CRL MP(MD) No.4259 of 2018 IN CRL OP(MD) No.7651 of 2018 Date :13/06/2018 MS/CM-VR/VK/20.06.2018/2P.5C

¶22

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

Perumal v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Perumal 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

Mahalingam Vs the Inspector of Police

Mohammed Sultan@Siddiq Vs the Inspector of Police

Shafeeque Vs the Inspector of Police

Rajappa Vs the Inspector of Police

Kanthiya Thevar Vs the Inspector of Police

Azeela Vs the Inspector of Police