Allowed

Sivaguru v. State Rep by

Madras HC21 Jul 2020CRL OP/10864/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case involving offences under IPC sections 294(b), 352, and 506(i). The petitioner was ordered to comply with specific reporting, non-absconding, and non-tampering conditions, with stricter penalties for breach.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail ordered to report daily for two weeks and execute bond with sureties, subject to strict conditions.

Sivaguru Vs State Rep by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 21.07.2020

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.10864 of 2020

Sivaguru

... petitioner

Vs.

State rep. by its The Inspector of Police Paravakottai Police Station, Thiruvarur District.

¶10

Crime No.610 of 2020 ... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.610 of 2020 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Paravakottai Police Station, Thiruvarur District.

¶12

For petitioner : Mr.Swami Subramanian For Respondent : Mr.M. Mohammed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

¶13

O R D E R (The case has been heard through video conference)

¶14

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 294(b), 352 and 506(i) IPC in Crime No.610 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶15

The case of the prosecution is that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the defacto complainant. At that time, the petitioner abused and attacked the defacto complainant and also threatened him with dire consequences. Hence the complaint.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶17

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that when the petitioner went near the defacto complainant's fishing pond with fish net, the defacto complainant obstructed him. At that time, the petitioner picked up quarrel with the defacto complainant, abused him and also threatened him with dire consequences. He would further submit that there is no previous case as against the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶19

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days after lifting of lockdowm or the commencement of Court's normal functioning whichever is earlier, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Mannargudi, Thiruvarur District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶20

[a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

¶21

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, every Monday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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].

¶25

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

¶26

8.With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.

¶27

-sd/-

¶28

21/07/2020

¶29

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶30

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶31

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

¶32

¶33

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MANNARGUDI,, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT

¶34

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶35

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PARAVAKOTTAI POLICE STATION. THIRUVARUR DISTRICT,

¶36

CC to M/S.SWAMI SUBRAMANIAN Advocate on payment of necessary
charges
CRL OP.10864/2020
Date :21/07/2020
RD 24/08/2020

¶37

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

Sivaguru v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sivaguru v. State Rep by

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

G.Mani Vs State Rep by

Muthu Vs State Rep.by

Gopinath Vs the State Rep.by

Aruna Vs State Rep.by

Ramu Vs State Rep by

Sarathkumar Vs State Represented by