Allowed

Pandi Selvi, v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Madras HC29 Jan 2019CRL OP(MD)/1306/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners charged with offences under IPC and the Women Harassment Act. The court imposed strict conditions including surrender within 15 days and release of advance bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail with bond of Rs.10,000 each and two sureties; surrender required within 15 days; further conditions imposed regarding interrogation and non-absconding.

Pandi Selvi, Vs the Sub Inspector of Police — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

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

¶3

Tuesday, the Twenty Ninth day of January Two Thousand Nineteen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

CRL OP(MD) No.1306 of 2019

¶7

1 PANDI SELVI 2 VELAYI 3 VELLAICHAMY ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3

¶8

¶9

STATE REP.BY

¶10

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE EMANESHWARAM POLICE STATION, PARAMAKUDI TALUK, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.8/2019) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

¶11

For Petitioners: Mr.K.PALMURUGAN, Advocate

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.K.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI, Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

¶13

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

¶14

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶15

The petitioners, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of Women Harassment Act in Cr.No. 8 of 2019 seek anticipatory bail.

¶16

2 . The case of the prosecution is that due to business rivalry the petitioners abused the defacto complainant, assaulted him and threatened him with dire consequences.

¶17

3 . The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he has nothing to do with the alleged offence . He would further submit that the injured has also been discharged from the hospital.

¶18

4 . The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) would submit that the injured had been discharged from the hospital.

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5. Taking into consideration the facts of the case and the submissions by learned counsels and that the injured has been

¶20

¶21

discharged from the hospital,this Court inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶22

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, before the learned Judicial Magistrate,Paramakudi on condition that 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 said Magistrate, on further condition that:

¶23

[a] if the petitioners fail to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled.

¶24

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation

¶25

[c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶26

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶27

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 learned 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].

¶28

[ f ] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

sd/-

29/01/2019

/ TRUE COPY /

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

¶33

¶34

THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PARAMAKUDI.

¶35

DO-THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶36

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

¶37

EMANESHWARAM POLICE STATION,

¶38

PARAMAKUDI TALUK, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶39

THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶40

MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶41

+1. CC to Mr.K.PALMURUGAN Advocate SR.No.1635

¶42

CRL OP(MD) No.1306 of 2019

¶43

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ MS/JC/SAR-1/01.02.2019/2P.6C

Pandi Selvi, v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pandi Selvi, v. the Sub 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

Raja, S/O.Gothandam, Vs State, Rep by Inspector of

Alaguvel Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

K.G.Abraham Vs the Inspector of Police

Balakrishnan Vs Elumalai Gounder

Saravanan Vs the Superintendent of Police

V. Karuppusami Vs Indira