Allowed

S. Nagarajan v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC10 Dec 2018CRL OP(MD)/21622/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who was apprehending arrest for offences under IPC sections 406, 420, etc., alleging cheating of the public. The Court imposed conditions including a bond of Rs. 10,000 with sureties, daily police reporting for 30 days, and directed the investigation agency to expedite the trial. The Court noted the petitioner's wife was the primary ac

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail conditioned on executing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, appearing daily before police for 30 days, and complying with Section 438 Cr.P.C. conditions.

S. Nagarajan Vs the Inspector of Police — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Tenth day of December Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT

¶3

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

¶4

CRL OP(MD) No.21622 of 2018

¶5

S. NAGARAJAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.2 Vs

¶6

STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, VIRUDHUNAGAR. IN CRIME NO. 7 OF 2018 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

¶7

For Petitioner : M/S.S.MAHALAKSHMI Advocate

¶8

For Respondent : MR.A.ROBINSON, Government Advocate

¶9

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

¶10

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶11

The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 r/w Section 34 and 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.7 of 2018, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶12

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent.

¶13

3.It appears that the petitioner's wife and one Reshma Davood induced the public and collected sums of money from them with a promise of getting employment. It appears that the petitioner's wife was a Office Bearer of a Political Party. Since they had not secured employment as promised, the present case came to be registered. This Court had dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner on the earlier occasion. But, till date the petitioner has not been arrested. It appears that the petitioner is only the husband of the person who collected the money from the public.

¶14

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that co-accused was granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions. But, the co-accused did not comply with the conditions.

¶15

5.This Court is of the view that in this circumstances a direction can be given to the respondent police. Accordingly, the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ respondent is directed to expedite the investigation and file final report.

¶16

¶17

6.With the above direction, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar and on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30. a.m. for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation. The petitioner shall comply with the conditions stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. The petitioner shall not apply for modification or relaxation of the condition imposed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not possessed any property. If this statement is not correct, the respondent is at liberty to apply for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶18

7.The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed.

¶19

sd/10/12/2018

¶20

/ TRUE COPY /

¶21

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

¶22

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II,

¶23

VIRUDHUNAGAR. 2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VIRUDHUNAGAR.

¶24

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

¶25

DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, VIRUDHUNAGAR. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶26

+1. CC to M/S.S.MAHALAKSHMI Advocate SR.No.22981

¶27

JM/VR MMS/SAR 2/20.12.2018/2P/6C

¶28

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

S. Nagarajan v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Nagarajan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh, S/O.Gopal, Vs the Inspector of Police

R. Parameswaran, Vs the Accountant General

Mohanavel, Vs the Inspector of Police

K. Selvaraj Vs the Assistant

T.Nithin, Vs the Regional Transport

K.Palaniyammal, Vs the District Collector