Allowed

Balasubramaniyan v. State Rep.by

Madras HC27 Aug 2020CRL OP/13070/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners charged with offences under IPC Sections 294(b), 324, and 506(ii). Bail was subject to appearance before a Magistrate within 15 days, execution of a bond with sureties, daily reporting, and prohibitions on tampering with evidence or absconding.

What did the court decide?

Penitential bail granted subject to appearance before Magistrate within 15 days, execution of bond with two sureties, and compliance with reporting and non-tampering conditions.

Balasubramaniyan Vs State Rep.by — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 27.08.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.13070 of 2020

¶6

1.Balasubramaniyan 2.Mahalakshmi ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2

¶7

Vs. The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Kottur Police Station, Thiruvarur District. Crime No. 1141 of 2020. ... Respondent/Complainant

¶8

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.1141 of 2020 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kottur Police Station, Thiruvarur District.

¶9

For Petitioners : Mr.Swamisubramainan

¶10

For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

(The case has been heard through video conference)

¶13

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 324, 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.1141 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶14

2 The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity the petitioners have abused and attacked the defacto complainant with knife and thereby, the defacto complainant has sustained grievous injuries. Hence, the complaint.

¶15

3 The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶16

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

¶17

4 The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. He further submitted that there are no previous cases pending against the petitioners. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶18

5 Taking into consideration the facts and submissions of the learned Counsel and the fact that the victim has been discharged from the hospital, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions;

¶19

6 Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Mannargudi, Thiruvarur District, on condition that each petitioner shall execute a separate 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 petitioners 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 first petitioner shall report before the respondent police every day at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter every Monday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. The second petitioner shall report before the respondent police every day at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

¶22

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

¶23

[d] the petitioners 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 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].

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

-sd/27/08/2020

¶29

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, MANNARGUDI, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT. 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTUR POLICE STATION, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT. CC to M/S.SWAMISUBRAMANIAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.13070/2020 Date :27/08/2020 MK:11/09/2020

¶30

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

Balasubramaniyan v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balasubramaniyan 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

R.Veeramani Vs State Rep by.

Indra Vs State, Rep. by

Yamini Preetha Vs State Rep by

Karthik Vs the State Rep by

Manivannan @ Padai Mani Vs State Rep.by

Romex Vs the State Rep.by