Allowed

Thirumalai Vasan v. State, Rep. by

Madras HC3 Sept 2020CRL OP/13557/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for alleged offences involving possession of 500 Kgs of PDS rice. Court granted bail contingent upon depositing Rs.25,000 as a non-refundable to Krishnagiri Municipality for Amma Unavagam and complying with strict reporting and bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail subject to depositing Rs.25,000 as non-refundable to Krishnagiri Municipality, execution of bond with sureties, daily reporting, and specific undertakings.

Thirumalai Vasan Vs State, Rep. by — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 03.09.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.13557 of 2020

Thirumalai Vasan

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Inspector of Police, Civil Supply CID, CSCID Wing Krishnagiri District. (Crime No.64 of 2020) ... Respondent

¶10

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.64 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Samivel

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz,

¶13

Additional Public Prosecutor

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

(The case has been heard through video conference)

¶16

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 6(4) of TNSC(RDCS) order 1982 r/w 7(1) (a), (ii) of E.C Act 1955 in Crime No.64 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶17

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found in possession of 500 Kgs of PDS rice . Hence, the complaint.

¶18

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. On instruction, he would further submit that the petitioner is prepared to deposit some considerable amount to any charitable organization or association without prejudice to his contention and prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶19

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner was found in possession of 500 Kgs of PDS rice. He further submitted that one previous case is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ pending against the petitioner. Hence, he opposed for grant of

¶20

anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶21

Taking note of the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) as non refundable deposit to The Commissioner, Krishnagiri Municipality (for the purpose of Amma Unavagam) without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court.

¶22

Merely, because the petitioner has deposited the said amount, it would not amount to admission of his guilt. Therefore, it is open to the trial Court to deal with the case independently.

¶23

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

¶24

(a) The petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/as non-refundable deposit either through RTGS/NEFT or in cash in favour of The Commissioner, Krishnagiri Municipality (for the purpose of Amma Unavagam) within fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. [*] Thereafter, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail in the event of his arrest or on his appearance and on production of proof of deposit of the above amount before the learned Judicial Magistrate-I,Krishnagiri , on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/(Ten thousand only) with two sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the police officer who intends to arrest, failing which the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed automatically and on further condition that the petitioner shall also give an letter of undertaking before the respondent/police that the said amount has been paid in respect of particular crime number.

¶25

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

¶26

[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

[f] 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]. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

-sd/-

¶33

03/09/2020

¶34

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

¶35

TRUE COPY

¶36

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

¶37

[*]for being mentioned and two weeks time is extended from the date of receipt of a copy of this order to comply with the conditions. The order conditions imposed by this court shall stand unaltered,as per the order of this court dated 16.09.2020 made in crl.O.P.No.13557 of 2020.

¶38

¶39

[*]1 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-I, KRISHNAGIRI

¶40

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶41

HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶42

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CIVIL SUPPLIES CRIME INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT (CSCID WING), KRISHNAGIRI, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT,

¶43

4 THE COMMISSIONER KRISHNGIRI MUNICIPALITY [FOR THE PURPOSE OF AMMA UNAVAGAM]

¶44

CC to M/S. C.SAMIVEL Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶45

CRL OP.13557/2020 Date :03/09/2020 RD 15/09/2020 RD 16/09/2020

¶46

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

Thirumalai Vasan v. State, Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thirumalai Vasan 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

N.Arun Kumar Vs State Represented by

M.K.Rajendran Vs Inspector of Police

S.Prabakaran Vs State Represented by

J.Arul Vs State Rep by

Ravichandran Vs State Rep by

Manimaran Vs State Rep. by