The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissed a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court held that despite the victim's discharge from hospital, the petitioner's conduct and lack of apprehension by police did not warrant bail, affirming the previous dismissal.
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.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Wednesday, the Ninth day of May Two Thousand Eighteen
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN
CRL OP(MD) No.7618 of 2018
PETCHI ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.4
STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SIPCOT POLICE STATION, IN CR.NO.116/2018, TUTICORIN DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
For Petitioner : M/S.C.SUSI KUMAR, Advocate
For Respondent : Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-
The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 324, 307 and 506(ii) I.P.C., in Crime No.116 of 2018, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.This Court had dismissed the petitioner's anticipatory bail petition on 11.04.2018. The petitioner has renewed the petition for anticipatory bail on the ground that the injured has since been discharged from the hospital. This Court, after going through the contentions of the FIR, noted that the petitioner was one of the four member group and that inflicted cut injuries on the face of the victim. The victim's finger also got cut. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
2
3.Taking note of the petitioner's conduct, this Court came to the conclusion that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail and there is no change in this factual position. It is surprising, the police are yet to apprehend the petitioner.
4.With these observations, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
sd/09/05/2018 / TRUE COPY /
Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO
1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SIPCOT POLICE STATION, TUTICORIN DISTRICT.
2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.7618 of 2018 Date :09/05/2018 PK/CM/RNB/14.05.2018 : 2P/3C
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner deserves anticipatory bail given the facts and their conduct in the case.
Whether the discharge of the injured party constitutes a change in legal circumstances sufficient for granting bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
PETCHI
STATE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
G.R. SWAMINATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
