Allowed

S.Kumar@Arunkumar v. State Rep by

Madras HC23 Nov 2020CRL OP/18447/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Madras granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner apprehending arrest under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) IPC. Conditions imposed include reporting daily, executing a bond, and prohibiting tampering with evidence or absconding.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on anticipatory bail conditioned to execute bond, report daily for two weeks, and not tamper with evidence or abscond.

S.Kumar@Arunkumar Vs State Rep by — Dowry and Cruelty | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 23.11.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTIC E M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.18447 of 2020

¶6

S.Kumar @ Arunkumar ... Petitioner Vs. State rep. By ... Respondent

¶7

State rep. By The Inspector of Police Pennadam Police Station Cuddalore - District (Crime No.691 of 2020)

¶8

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.691 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Karuppaiyamooppanar For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER (The case has been heard through video conference)

¶10

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.691 of 2020, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶11

The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant Aravindhsamy is that on 01.07.2020 at about 10 p.m., the petitioner along with other accused abused and attacked the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint.

¶12

The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶13

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and there is no previous case as against the petitioner. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶14

Considering the above fact and circumstances of the case and the fact that there is no previous case against the petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and the injured has been discharged from the hospital, this Court is

¶15

inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶16

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tittagudi, Cuddalore District, on condition that 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 Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶17

[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.

¶18

[b] the petitioner 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.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

[e] 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].

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

TRUE COPY

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TITTAGUDI, CUDDALORE DISTRICT. 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, CUDDALORE [FOR INFORMATION]. 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS. 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PENNADAM POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT. CC to M/S.K.KARUPPAIYAMOOPPANAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.18447/2020 Date :23/11/2020 MN-01/12/2020

¶28

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

S.Kumar@Arunkumar v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Kumar@Arunkumar 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.Muthumurugan Vs The Inspector of Police

Raja Vs State Rep by

Sibi @ Sibi Anand Vs the Sub Divisional Executive

A.Aathi Jeyanantham Vs the State Rep by

T.Ravikumar Vs the State Rep by

Rayapillai Vs State Rep by