Allowed

Govindhsamy v. State Rep by Its

Madras HC5 Nov 2020CRL OP/17388/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras, in a bail case, granted anticipatory bail to three petitioners accused of assaulting a neighbour and committing public nuisance. The court imposed conditions including daily reporting and posting of bonds.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to execution of separate bonds with sureties, daily reporting, and prohibition from tampering with evidence or absconding.

Govindhsamy Vs State Rep by Its — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 05.11.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTIC E A. D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.17388 of 2020

¶6

Govindhasamy

¶7

Palaniyamal

¶8

Thinakaran

¶9

Meena ... Petitioners

¶10

Vs.

¶11

The State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, Thiruchengode Rural Police Station, Namakkal District. (Cr.No.1210 of 2020) ...Respondent

¶12

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Connection with the Crime No.1210 of 2020 pending on the file of the respondent police.

¶13

For Petitioners : Mr.W.Camyles Gandhi

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz,

¶15

Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER

¶16

(This case has been heard through video conference)

¶17

The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294 (b), 323 & 506 (ii) of IPC, in Crime No.1210 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶18

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners and the de facto complainant are neighbours. Due to wordy quarrel between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, the petitioners have assaulted the defacto complainant, as a result of which, he sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶20

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

¶21

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and there are no previous cases as against the petitioners. He would further submit that there is a case in counter in Cr.No.1209 of 2020. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶22

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

¶23

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the copy of the order is made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchengode, on condition that each of the 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:

¶24

[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.

¶25

[b] the petitioners 1 and 3 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. Petitioners 2 and 4 shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter as and when required.

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

[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].

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

-sd/05/11/2020

¶33

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

¶34

TRUE COPY
Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.)
High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
THIRUCHENGODE
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
NAMAKKAL(FOR INFORMATION)
3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
THIRUCHENGODE RURAL POLICE STATION,
NAMAKKAL DISTRICT

¶35

CC to M/S. W.CAMYLES GANDHI Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.7318 CRL OP.17388/2020 Date :05/11/2020 RVR 19/11/2020

¶36

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

Govindhsamy v. State Rep by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govindhsamy v. State Rep by Its

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

Saravanan Vs the State Rep by

P.Muthulingam Vs the State Rep by

Santhosh Vs State Rep.by

B.Vasanthakumar Vs State by the Inspector of Police

P.Sathish Kumar Vs State Rep by

M.Kamal Vs State Rep.by