The Madras High Court granted bail to the petitioners accused of rioting and other offences. The court imposed strict conditions including a security deposit, a bond with sureties, and compliance with interrogation requirements, citing Supreme Court precedent.
Release of petitioners on bail subject to deposit of a sum and execution of a bond with sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Tuesday, the Seventeenth day of April Two Thousand and Eighteen
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN
CRL OP(MD) No.6155 of 2018
1 BOSE 2 RAJENDRAN ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED No.1 & 2
Vs THE STATE REP. BY
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE MUDHUKULATHUR POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.
IN CR NO. 34 OF 2018. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT
For Petitioner : M/S.S.MUNIYANDI Advocate
For Respondent : M/S. A.P.G.OHM CHAIRMA PRABHU, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)
For Intervenor : Mr.K.Muthuvai Ilayaraja, Intervenor
PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-
The petitioners are arrayed as Accused Nos.1 and 2. They were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.03.2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 324 and 506(ii) I.P.C., altered into under Section 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 324, , 326, 379(NH) and 506(ii) I.P.C., and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act, in Crime No.34 of 2018, on the file of the respondent police. They seek bail.
2.The accused herein have assaulted the defacto complainant viz., Sankaran and also caused extensive damages to the vehicle of the defacto complainant, worth about Rs.50,000/-.
3.Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side).
4.Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ on bail, subject to the following conditions;
(i) the petitioners shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) to the credit of Crime No.34 of 2018 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Mudhukulathur within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter,the defacto complainant is entitled to withdraw the said amount.
(ii) if the petitioners are not deposit the said amount within a stipulated period as mentioned above, the bail granted in favour of the petitioners shall stand automatically cancelled and the respondent shall commit the petitioners to custody again.
(iii)the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Mudhukulathur.
(iv)the petitioners are directed to appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.
(v)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560].
sd/-
17/04/2018
/ TRUE COPY /
Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ MUDHUKULATHUR POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.
5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.6155 of 2018 Date :17/04/2018 SDS/CM/ASVM/17.04.2018/3P/8C
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in view of the nature of allegations.
What conditions are necessary for granting bail in the facts of the present case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
P.K.Shaji vs. State of KeralaExplained¶23
P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560] · Who else cites this
5 provisions across 4 enactments
BOSE
RAJENDRAN
THE STATE
G.R.SWAMINATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
