Murugavel v. State Rep by
Case brief
What is this about?
Anticipatory bail petition heard ex-parte due to absence of the petitioner. Court directed the respondent to take further steps in accordance with law.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 18.08.2020
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA
Crl.O.P.No.11134 of 2020
Murugavel ... Petitioner
Vs. The State Represented by, Station House Officer, Kumaratchi Police Station, Cuddalore District. (Crime No. 61 of 2020) ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.61 of 2020 on the file of respondent Police.
For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondent : Mr.K.Prabakar Additional Public Prosecutor O R D E R
(The case has been heard through video conference)
Today, this case is posted under the caption "for reporting compliance".
2.When the matter was taken up for hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner. Therefore, the respondent shall take further steps in accordance with law.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Murugavel
- respondent
The State Represented by, Station House Officer, Kumaratchi Police Station, Cuddalore District
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court