Allowed

M.Pradeep Kannan v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC10 Nov 2020CRL OP(MD)/12731/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, accusing him of offences under IPC sections 294(b), 323, 498(A), and 506(i) regarding dowry harassment and assault, considering that other co-accused were already on bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail upon arrest or appearance within two weeks, subject to conditions including a bond with sureties and reporting requirements.

M.Pradeep Kannan Vs The Inspector of Police — Dowry and Cruelty | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.12731 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10/11/2020

¶4

PRESENT The Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.M.SUBRAMANIAM CRL OP(MD). No.12731 of 2020

¶5

M.Pradeep Kannan ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs

¶6

The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Ayakkudi Police Station, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District. Crime No.587/2020 ... Respondent/Complainant

¶7

For Petitioner : M/s.J.Balameenakshi, Advocate. For Respondent : Ms.M.AnanthaDevi, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

¶8

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

¶9

PRAYER :-

¶10

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.587 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent Police.

¶11

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶12

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

¶13

The petitioner, who is arrayed as A1, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 294(b), 323, 498(A) and 506(i) of I.P.C., in Crime No.587 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶14

3.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other co-accused harassed the de-facto complainant for want of more dowry and also attacked her and hence, the present complaint has been registered.

¶15

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 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ implicated in this case. Hence, he seek anticipatory bail.

¶16

1/3

¶17

CRL OP(MD). No.12731 of 2020

¶18

5.The learned Government Advocate(Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police made a submission that the co-accused A2 to A5 had already been released on bail.

¶19

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the co-accused A2 to A5 had already been released on bail, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶20

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, Palani, Dindigul 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 to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned 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 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 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;

¶26

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

¶27

/ TRUE COPY /

¶28

/ /2020

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

2/3

¶32

CRL OP(MD). No.12731 of 2020

¶33

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.

¶34

¶35

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PALANI, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

¶36

2 -DO-THROUGH : THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

¶37

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AYAKKUDI POLICE STATION, PALANI TALUK, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

¶38

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶39

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12731 of 2020 Date :10/11/2020

¶40

¶41

SRS/JC/SAR-III/19.11.2020/3P/5C

¶42

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

¶43

3/3

M.Pradeep Kannan v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Pradeep Kannan 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

Statutes considered

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

G.Jeyaraj Pandiyan Vs The Inspector of Police