The Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to four petitioners accused of assault and harassment under various IPC sections and the Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act, imposing strict reporting and bond conditions.
Petitioners enlarged on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 each and strictly monitored conditions including daily reporting.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRL OP(MD).No.13099 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Date : 19/11/2020
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
CRL OP(MD).No.13099 of 2020
1.V.Ganesan
2.G.Rajendran 3.G.Saraswathi
4.R.Uthradevi @ Sudha ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4
Vs
The State rep.by The Inspector of Police, R.S. Mangalam Police Station, Ramnad District. Crime No.339 of 2020. ... Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioners: Mr.M.Shenbagapandi, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C.
PRAYER :-
For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.339 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :-
The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1 to A4, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 294(b), 323, 324, 342, 506(i) IPC, and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act, in Crime No.339 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners have assaulted the defacto complainant and his mother. Hence the case has been registered.
1/3
CRL OP(MD).No.13099 of 2020
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) brought to the notice of this Court that that it is a case in counter and the injured person had already been discharged from the hospital.
5.This being the factum brought to the notice of this Court, the petitioners are enlarged on anticipatory bail with certain conditions.
6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or their appearance, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvadanai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each 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:
(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;
(b)the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. without fail for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;
(c)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(d)the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(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]; and;
(f)if the accused/petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.
/ TRUE COPY /
/ /2020
Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
2/3
CRL OP(MD).No.13099 of 2020
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.
TO
1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUVADANAI. 2.DO THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT. 3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, R. S. MANGALAM POLICE STATION, RAMNAD DISTRICT. 4.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.13099 of 2020 Date :19/11/2020 VSD AE/AKM/SAR-II (23.11.2020) 3P 5C
3/3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in an assault and harassment case.
Whether conditions can be imposed upon the release of the petitioners on anticipatory bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
P.K.Shaji Vs. State of KeralaRelied on¶32
P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560] · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 3 enactments
V.Ganesan
G.Rajendran
G.Saraswathi
R.Uthradevi @ Sudha
The State rep.by The Inspector of Police, R.S. Mangalam Police Station
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
