Allowed

S.Balaji v. State Rep. by

Madras HC6 Oct 2020CRL OP/15682/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a criminal original petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail for alleged theft of a cow under Section 379 IPC. The court granted the petition subject to specific conditions including execution of a bond, daily reporting, and prohibitions against tampering with evidence or absconding.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail subject to execution of bond, daily reporting to police, and prohibitions against tampering with evidence or absconding.

S.Balaji Vs State Rep. by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

Crl.OP.No.15682 of 2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 06.10.2020

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

Crl.OP.No.15682 of 2020
S.Balaji
S/o. Sesha ... Petitioner
Vs.
The State represented by
The Sub Inspector of police,
Arakkonam Town Police Station,
Ranipet District.
Crime No.816 of 2020 ... Respondent

¶7

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.816 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.D.K.Nepolean For Respondent : Mr.M. Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

¶9

Page 1 of 6

¶10

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶11

Crl.OP.No.15682 of 2020

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

(This case has been heard through video conference)

¶14

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the

¶15

respondent police for the offences publishable under Section 379 of IPC in

¶16

Crime No.816 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶17

The case of the prosecution, as per the defacto complainant

¶18

viz.,J.Suresh is that on 29.08.2020, the petitioner has committed theft of a

¶19

cow. Hence the complaint.

¶20

The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the

¶21

petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this

¶22

case. He would further submit that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶23

Page 2 of 6

¶24

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶25

Crl.OP.No.15682 of 2020

¶26

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that

¶27

the stolen cow was recovered. He would further submit that there is no previous case as against the petitioner. However, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶28

Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of

¶29

the case and also the submissions of the learned counsel, this Court is

¶30

inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions;

¶31

Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail

¶32

in the event of his arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen

¶33

days from the date on which the copy of this order is made ready, 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 Judicial Magistrate, Arakkonam, failing which,

¶34

Page 3 of 6

¶35

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶36

Crl.OP.No.15682 of 2020

¶37

the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶38

[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

¶39

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police every day at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

trial.

¶43

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate 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 himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

¶44

Page 4 of 6

¶45

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶46

Crl.OP.No.15682 of 2020

¶47

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

¶48

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

¶49

ordered.
06.10.2020
(4/4)
dh
Internet: Yes/No
Index: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate,
Arakkonam.
2. The Sub Inspector of police,
Arakkonam Town Police Station,
Ranipet District.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court, Chennai.

¶50

Page 5 of 6

¶51

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶52

Crl.OP.No.15682 of 2020

¶53

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J

¶54

dh
Crl.OP.No. 15682 of 2020
06.10.2020
(4/4)

¶55

Page 6 of 6

¶56

http://www.judis.nic.in

S.Balaji v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Balaji 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

Murugan Vs the State Rep.by

Aravinth Vs the State Rep by

Archana Padmakumar Vs the State, Represented by

P.Kathirvel Vs State Rep by

Kathirvel Vs State Rep by

K.Sivasakthi Vs the State Rep by