Allowed

Elaya Raja, Aged 31 Years, v. the State Rep. by

Madras HC6 Feb 2018CRL OP/3388/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court modified a bail condition imposed by the Sessions Court, substituting a mandatory deposit of Rs. 3,00,000 with an undertaking bond of the same amount, relying on precedents against onerous bail conditions under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

The condition to deposit Rs. 3,00,000/– was modified to execute a bond of undertaking of the same amount.

Elaya Raja, Aged 31 Years, Vs the State Rep. by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 06.02.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

¶5

CRL.O.P.No.3388 of 2018

¶6

Elaya Raja ... Petitioner Vs The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, R-2, Kodambakkam Police Station, Chennai. ... Respondent (Crime No.999 of 2017)

¶7

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to direct the respondent to modify the 3^rd condition imposed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge at Chennai in Crl.M.P.No.1408 of 2018 dated on 31.01.2018.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sugendran For Respondent : Mr.C.Raghavan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) O R D E R

¶9

The petitioner, who has been arrayed as accused in Crime No.999 of 2017 was granted bail by the learned Judicial Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai on 31.01.2018 on pre-condition to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-. Seeking to modify the same, the present petition has been filed.

¶10

2.Heard Mr.S.Sugendran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.C.Raghavan, learned Government Advocate

¶11

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

¶12

(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent.

¶13

This Court had an occasion to deal with the validity of onerous conditions being passed while granting orders of bail or anticipatory bail or release of vehicles in Thiruvasagam Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police, B1, North Beach Police Station, Chennai-600 001 in Crl.O.P.No.20483 of 2017 dated 05.10.2017. By relying on various judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court, it was held therein that the Courts are not empowered to impose onerous conditions.

¶14

Following the rationale laid down in the various orders of the

¶15

Hon'ble Supreme Court, the onerous condition came to be modified in the said order.

¶16

I am of the view that the present condition imposed by

¶17

the trial Court is a similar onerous condition and in view of

¶18

the stand taken in the aforesaid order, the present petition seeking for modification also requires consideration.

¶19

allowed. Consequently, the third condition imposed on the petitioner in Crl.M.P.No.1408 of 2018 by its order dated 31.01.2018 directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- shall stand modified as follows:

¶20

“The petitioner shall execute a bond

¶21

of undertaking to the tune of

¶22

Rs.3,00,000/- instead of depositing a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-.

¶23

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

¶24

All other conditions imposed in the order dated 31.01.2018 in Crl.M.P.No.1408 of 2018 shall remain intact.

¶25

Sd/-
Deputy Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
nmm
To
1.The learned Principal Session Judge,
Chennai.
2.The Inspector of Police,
R-2, Kodambakkam Police Station,
Chennai.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.S.Sugendran, Advocate, S.R.No.8679
Crl.O.P.No.3388 of 2018
RRK(07/02/2018)

¶26

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

Elaya Raja, Aged 31 Years, v. the State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Elaya Raja, Aged 31 Years, v. the State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Karthikeyan, M/a 48 Years, Vs the Commissioner of Police

L.Jaishankar, Aged 44 Years, Vs Mohan Harinath

A.Germanraj, Aged 45 Years, Vs State Rep. by

A.Leema Mary, A/22 Vs State Rep by

Dr.S.M.Zambia, Aged 53 Years, Vs the Commissioner of Police

Pramila Sankaran, Vs the Commissioner of Police