Allowed

Vijay v. State Rep by

Madras HC17 Jun 2020CRL OP/8862/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for apprehended arrest in a case involving hurting, assault, and criminal intimidation. The Court granted bail subject to conditions including reporting to police, not tampering with evidence, and not absconding.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted in the event of arrest, subject to execution of bond with sureties and specific conditions regarding reporting and conduct.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED :01.07.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTIC E G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.8862 of 2020

¶6

Vijay

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Rathinapurai Police Station, Coimbatore District. (Crime No.753 of 2020) ... Respondent

¶9

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.753 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.W.Camyles Gandhi

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz,

¶12

Additional Public Prosecutor

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 75 (1)(c),323, 324, 386 and 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.753 of 2020, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶15

The case of the prosecution is that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the defacto complainant and it is alleged that the petitioner and other accused persons abused and assaulted the defacto complainant with hands and thereby the defacto complainant sustained grievous injuries. Hence, the complaint.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶17

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner and other accused persons attacked the defacto complainant with hands. He would also submit that the injured person discharged from the hospital and there are no previous cases pending against the petitioner.

¶18

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

¶19

Considering the above fact and circumstances of the case and the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶20

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 made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Coimbatore, 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:

¶21

[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.

¶22

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

[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].

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

TRUE COPY

¶29

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶30

¶31

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, COIMBATORE

¶32

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COIMBATORE DISTRICT[FOR INFORMATION]

¶33

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT,MADRAS.

¶34

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RATHINAPURAI POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE DISTRICT.

¶35

CC to W.CAMYLES GANDHI Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶36

CRL OP.8862/2020

¶37

Date :01/07/2020 GKS(MK):06/08/2020

¶38

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

Vijay v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay 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

Muruganandam Vs The Inspector of Police

T.Madasamy Vs the inspector of police

S. Karthi Vs The Inspector of Police

M.Gurunathan Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

Prathap Vs The Inspector of Police

Arunachalam Vs The Inspector of Police