Allowed

G.Jeyaraj Pandiyan v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC10 Nov 2020CRL OP(MD)/12718/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the sole accused petitioner in a case involving a property dispute and offences under sections 385, 500, and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code, subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon arrest or appearance within two weeks, subject to bond execution with two sureties and compliance with specified conditions.

G.Jeyaraj Pandiyan Vs The Inspector of Police — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.12718 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Date : 10/11/2020

¶4

PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶5

CRL OP(MD). No.12718 of 2020

¶6

G.Jeyaraj Pandiyan ... Petitioner/Sole Accused

¶7

The State rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Sivagiri Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

¶8

Crime No.472 of 2020. ... Respondent/Complainant

¶9

For Petitioner : M/s.A.Devaki,

¶10

Advocate.

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.KR.Bharathi Kannan, Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

¶12

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

¶13

PRAYER :-

¶14

For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.472 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

¶15

ORDER :The Court made the following order :-

¶16

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent.

¶17

2.The petitioner, who is arrayed as a sole accused, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 385, 500 and 506(ii) of I.P.C., in Crime No.472 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶18

3.The case of the prosecution is that there is a property dispute between the petitioner/accused and the de-facto complainant. Hence, the present complaint.

¶19

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he seek anticipatory bail.

¶20

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

¶21

1/3

¶22

CRL OP(MD). No.12718 of 2020

¶23

5.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner.

¶24

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also

¶25

considering the fact that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶26

7.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri, 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 to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

¶27

(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;

¶28

(b)the petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation;

¶29

(c)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶30

(d)the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶31

(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 impsed 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); and;

¶32

(f)if the petitioner/accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

¶33

/ TRUE COPY /

¶34

/ /2020

¶35

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

¶36

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶37

2/3

¶38

CRL OP(MD). No.12718 of 2020

¶39

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶40

¶41

1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGIRI

¶42

2.DO-THROUGH : THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. 3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SIVAGIRI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. 4.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶43

+1. CC to M/S.A.DEVAKI Advocate SR.No.7482 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12718 of 2020 Date :10/11/2020 NSJ PK/AKM/SAR-II/19.11.2020 : 3P/6C

¶44

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

¶45

3/3

G.Jeyaraj Pandiyan v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Jeyaraj Pandiyan v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Sathiamoorthy, Vs the Joint Director of

Kanmani Vs The Inspector of Police

S.Deepak Vs The Inspector of Police

Meenakshi Vs The Inspector of Police

A.Hari @ Hariharan Vs The Inspector of Police

M.Pradeep Kannan Vs The Inspector of Police