Allowed

Mannar v. State Rep by

Madras HC2 Dec 2020CRL OP/18845/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras, in a Criminal Original Petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., granted anticipatory bail to three petitioners facing charges for assault and grievous hurt. The court imposed standard conditions including reporting to police, executing bonds with sureties, and prohibiting absconding.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail upon arrest within 15 days subject to executing bond, reporting to police, and other conditions.

Mannar Vs State Rep by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 02.12.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTIC E M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.18845 of 2020

¶6

Mannar ... Petitioners
2. Devika @ Maathra Devi
3. Unnamalai
Vs.
The State Represented by, ...Respondent
The Inspector of Police,
Kaveripattinam Police Station,
Krishnagiri District.
(Cr.No.1319 of 2020)
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.1319 of 2020 pending on the
file of the respondent police.
For Petitioners: Mr.E.Kannadasan
For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz,
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER

¶7

(This case has been heard through video conference)

¶8

The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294 (b), 323, 324 & 506 (ii) of IPC, in Crime No.1319 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶9

2.The case of the prosecution is that due to pathway dispute, there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, the petitioners have assaulted the defacto complainant with knife on his hand, as a result of which, he sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint.

¶10

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ implicated in this case. He would further submit that they have not

¶11

committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶12

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. He would further submit that there are no previous cases as against the petitioners. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶13

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;

¶14

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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pochampalli, 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:

¶15

[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.

¶16

[b] the petitioners 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.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

[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].

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

-sd/02/12/2020

¶24

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

¶25

TRUE COPY

¶26

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.)
High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 THE DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
POCHAMPALLI.
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
KRISHNAGIRI [FOR INFORMATION].
3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KAVERIPATTINAM POLICE STATION,
KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT.
CC to M/S E.KANNADASAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges
CRL OP.18845/2020
Date :02/12/2020
MN-15/12/2020

¶27

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

Mannar v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mannar 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

G.Sivakumar Vs State Rep by

Ramu @ Raman Vs the State Rep by

G.Arumugam Vs State Rep by

M.Prashanth Vs State Represented by

T.Valli Vs State Rep.by

Raja Vs the State Rep by