Allowed

Mayakannan v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC26 Nov 2020CRL OP(MD)/13433/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Driven by the Covid-19 lockdown, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to six accused persons facing charges for illegal assembly, damaging fencing, and theft. The court imposed conditions including a monetary payment to the complainant, daily reporting, and executing a bail bond.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to payment of Rs. 2,00,000/- to the complainant, execution of a bond, daily reporting for three weeks, and conditions against tampering with evidence or absconding.

Mayakannan Vs The Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.13433 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 26/11/2020

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.13433 of 2020

¶8

Mayakannan

¶9

Lakshmanan

¶10

Ilangovan

¶11

Murugesan

¶12

Kathiresan

¶13

Sarathkumar

¶14

Barathkumar @ Barathi

¶15

Rajendran

¶16

...Petitioners/Accused Nos.2,3 and 5 to 10

¶17

¶18

State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Elayangudi Police Station, Sivagangai District. Crime No.383 of 2020. ... Respondent/Complainant

¶19

For Petitioners: Mr.S.T.Sasidharan Tamilkani, Advocate. For Respondent : M/s.M.Anantha Devi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶20

For Intervener : Mrs.A.Banumathy, Advocate

¶21

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

¶22

PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.383 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent Police.

¶23

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶24

The petitioners, who are arrayed as Accused Nos.2, 3 and 5 to 10, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 427 and 379 of IPC, in Crime No.383 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶25

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners and other accused persons unlawfully assembled in the defacto complainant's land and damaged the stone fencing and theft of wire worth about https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Rs.3,45,000/-. Hence, the present complaint.

¶26

1/3

¶27

CRL OP(MD). No.13433 of 2020

¶28

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and intervener/defacto complainant and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent.

¶29

4.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. He further submitted that the disputed land belongs to the Muniyaiah Temple, but the defacto complainant created a forged document and got an patta in favour of him. When the same was questioned by the petitioners, the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he seek anticipatory bail.

¶30

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioners and other accused persons unlawfully assembled in the defacto complainant's land and damaged the stone fencing and theft of wire worth about Rs.3,45,000/-.

¶31

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that there is no previous case pending against the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

¶32

7.Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- directly to the defacto complainant. On such payment, 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, Elayangudi, Sivagangai District, 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:

¶33

(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;

¶34

(b)the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

2/3

¶39

CRL OP(MD). No.13433 of 2020

¶40

(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;

¶41

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

¶42

sd/26/11/2020 / TRUE COPY /

¶43

/ /2020

¶44

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶45

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.

¶46

¶47

THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ELAYANGUDI, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.

¶48

DO-THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.

¶49

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ELAYANGUDI POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.

¶50

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

¶51

MS/PN/SAR-3/03.12.2020/3P.5C

¶52

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

¶53

3/3

Mayakannan v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mayakannan 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.Varadharajan, Vs the Inspector of Police

M.Karpoora Sundaram Vs The Deputy Superitendent of Police

Maharajan Vs the Inspector of Police

Rengaraj Vs The Inspector of Police

Parthiban Vs The Inspector of Police

P. Ramesh Vs the Inspector of Police