Partly allowed

Balu @ Balasubramanian v. the State Rep by

Madras HC28 Jan 2019CRL OP/2081/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court modified the bail conditions imposed by the Judicial Magistrate, allowing the petitioner to furnish two sureties without the mandatory requirement that one be a relative, substituting a bond execution condition.

What did the court decide?

Modification of bail conditions to require execution of a bond for Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, removing the condition that one must be a relative.

Balu @ Balasubramanian Vs the State Rep by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28.01.2019

¶2

CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶3

CRL.O.P.No.2081 of 2019

¶4

Balu @ Balasubramanian

¶5

... Petitioners/Accused

¶6

Vs.

¶7

State rep. by The Inspector of Police, S-8, Adambakkam Police Station. Crime No.436 of 2018. ... Respondent/Complainant

¶8

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439(1)(b) Cr.P.C. praying to modify the condition imposed on the petitioner herein by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alandur in Crl.M.P.No.7633 of 2018 vide order dated 28.12.2018.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Dhanasekar

¶10

For Respondent : Mrs.M.Prabhavathi Additional Public Prosecutor *****

¶11

This petition has been filed for modification of the conditions imposed on the petitioner herein by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alandur in Crl.M.P.No.7633 of 2018 vide order dated 28.12.2018.

¶12

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.07.2018 alleging that they have committed an offence punishable under Section 380 IPC. Thereafter, the petitioner was granted bail by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alandur on 28.12.2018 with certain conditions that the petitioners shall furnish two genuine sureties and one should be a relative.

¶13

He would further submit that the petitioner's parents and his relatives are not willing to give sureties to the petitioner, hence he prays to modify the said condition imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alandur.

¶14

Heard both sides.

¶15

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

¶16

In view of the submissions made on both sides this court is inclined to modify the condition imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alandur. Accordingly, the condition is modified to the effect that the petitioner shall “execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each with two sureties each" instead of "executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- along with two genuine sureties, one must be relative"

¶17

6.This Criminal Original Petition is ordered accordingly.

¶18

Sd/-

¶19

Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)

¶20

//True Copy//

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

dsa

¶23

¶24

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Alandur.

¶25

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

¶26

3.The Inspector of Police,

¶27

S-8, Adambakkam Police Station.

¶28

+1cc to Mr.T.Dhanasekaran, Advocate, S.R.No.6622

¶29

CRL.O.P.No.2081 of 2019

¶30

SJ(CO)

¶31

rrs 29/01/2019

¶32

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

Balu @ Balasubramanian v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balu @ Balasubramanian 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jestin Vs the Superintendent of Police

Noor Mohammed @ Navaman @ Rameez Vs the State Rep by Its

Balakrishna Menan Vs the State Rep by Its

Kavitha Vs the State Rep. by

Rahul Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

B.Shivaji Rao Age 57 Vs State Rep by