Allowed

S.Senthamilselvan, v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC16 Apr 2018CRL OP(MD)/5990/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court granted the petitioner anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a criminal case involving assault, public nuisance, and criminal intimidation. The court imposed conditions including appearance before a Magistrate and police interrogations.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail with conditions: appearance before Magistrate within 15 days, execution of bond with sureties, and appearance for police interrogation.

S.Senthamilselvan, Vs the Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

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

¶2

Monday, the Sixteenth day of April Two Thousand Eighteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

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

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.5990 of 2018

¶6

S.SENTHAMILSELVAN, ... PETITIONER

¶7

¶8

THE STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SAMAYAPURAM POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT. (IN CR.NO.94 OF 2018) ... RESPONDENT

¶9

For Petitioner : M/S.P.GANAPATHISUBRAMANIAN Advocate

¶10

For Respondent : MR.A.ROBINSON, Government Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶11

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

¶12

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶13

The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.94 of 2018, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶14

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 06.04.2018, due to election dispute, the petitioner assaulted the defacto complainant and also abused him by using filthy language and threatened with dire consequences.

¶15

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution.

¶16

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent submitted that no previous case pending against the petitioner.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, 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 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Trichy, and on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two

¶18

sureties 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 as and when required for interrogation. The petitioner shall comply with the conditions stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously.

¶19

6.The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate

¶20

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.

¶21

sd/16/04/2018 / TRUE COPY /

¶22

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

¶23

Madurai - 625 023.

¶24

¶25

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.III, TRICHY

¶26

2 DO THROGUH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TRICHY DISTRICT.

¶27

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

¶28

SAMAYAPURAM POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT.

¶29

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

¶30

+1. CC to M/S.P.GANAPATHISUBRAMANIAN Advocate SR.No.6274

¶31

DAS

¶32

GJM/PN/RNB/20.4.18-2P-6C

¶33

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

S.Senthamilselvan, v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Senthamilselvan, 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Veera Lakshmi Vs the Superintendent of Police

Pavul Arockiyaraj, Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

R.Markandan, Vs the Superintendent of Police

Kannan, Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

M.Chelladurai, Vs the Sub-Inspector of Police

T.Amuthan Vs the Deputy Superintendent of