Disposed

Sivakumar v. State Rep.by

Madras HC18 Mar 2020CRL OP/6224/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Court reserved its opinion on granting anticipatory bail. The Government Advocate noted the inquiry was pending. The Court directed the police to complete the inquiry within four weeks and prohibited arrest during this period, provided the petitioner cooperates.

What did the court decide?

Police directed to complete enquiry within 4 weeks; petitioner not to be arrested pending pursuit of enquiry.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Wednesday, the Eighteenth day of March Two Thousand Twenty

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice V. BHARATHIDASAN

¶6

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.6224 of 2020

¶7

SIVAKUMAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

¶8

Vs STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, ERODE DISTRICT. CR.NO.NOT KNOWN OF 2020.

¶9

For Petitioner : M/S.B.VASUDEVAN Advocate

¶10

For Respondent : M/S.S.THANKIRA, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶11

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

¶12

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶13

When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that petition enquiry is pending in this case.

¶14

The Police cannot keep the complaint at the stage of petition enquiry for long without registering a regular case.

¶15

Under such circumstances, the respondent police is directed to complete the enquiry within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till then, the petitioner shall not be arrested by the respondent police. The petitioner is directed to appear for enquiry on receipt of notice from the respondent police and co-operate with enquiry. It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to appear for enquiry, despite notice, it is always open to the respondent to take appropriate action in accordance with law.

¶16

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

¶17

The petition is closed accordingly.

¶18

-sd/18/03/2020

¶19

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

¶20

TRUE COPY

¶21

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.)
High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH,
ERODE DISTRICT.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
+1 CC to M/S.B.VASUDEVAN Advocate on payment of necessary
charges SR.NO.5359
CRL OP.6224/2020
Date :18/03/2020
TA-22/05/2020

¶22

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

Sivakumar v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sivakumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.Nandhakumar Vs The Chairman

S.Nagarajan Vs The Registrar

Manivel Vs The Inspector of Police

S.Dhanasekar Vs the Inspector of Police

D.Krishnamurthy Vs the Inspector of Police

Naveenatham Vs the State Rep. by