Allowed

Kirubakaran v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC30 Dec 2020CRL OP(MD)/16147/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to five petitioners who were accused of offences including rioting and hurt during a quarrel. The court imposed strict conditions, including daily police reporting and a bond, allowing the petitioners release upon arrest or appearance within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners are ordered released on bail upon arrest or appearance within two weeks, subject to executing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and complying with daily reporting and other conditions.

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

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.16147 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 30/12/2020

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN

¶7

CRL OP(MD) No.16147 of 2020

¶8

Kirubakaran

¶9

Alavudeen

¶10

Kumar @ Kumaravel

¶11

Sanjay @ Sanjaykumar

¶12

Selvam ... Petitioners/Accused No.1to5

¶13

The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Singampunari Police Station, Sivagangai District. Crime No.480 of 2020. ... Respondent/Complainant

¶14

For Petitioners: M/s.S.MP.Amalan, Advocate.

¶15

For Respondent : Mr.M.V.Chandrasekaran, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

¶16

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

¶17

PRAYER :-

¶18

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.480 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent Police.

¶19

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶20

The petitioners, who are arrayed as accused, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.430 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶21

The case of the prosecution is that due to wordy quarrel in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ a drunken mood, the petitioners are said to have attacked the

¶22

1/3

¶23

CRL OP(MD). No.16147 of 2020

¶24

defacto complainant with bottle and knife and caused injuries. Hence, the complaint.

¶25

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and their names have been falsely implicated in this case.

¶26

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent Police submitted that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and the investigation is pending.

¶27

5.Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with conditions.

¶28

6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Singampunari on condition that the petitioners 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:

¶29

(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;

¶30

(b)the petitioners 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;

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

(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;

¶34

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

¶35

2/3

¶36

CRL OP(MD). No.16147 of 2020

¶37

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

¶38

sd/-

¶39

30/12/2020

¶40

/ TRUE COPY / / /2021 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶41

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.

¶42

¶43

THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SINGAMPUNARI.

¶44

-DO-THROUGH : THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.

¶45

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

¶46

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

¶47

ORDER

¶48

IN CRL OP(MD) No.16147 of 2020 Date :30/12/2020 TRP/OGY SRS/VR/SAR-IV/04.01.2021/3P/5C

¶49

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

¶50

3/3

Kirubakaran v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kirubakaran 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

Sekar Vs Inspector of Police

T.Arokia Selvin Vs the Director

B.Dineshkumar, Vs D.Saritha

Eswaran Vs The Inspector of Police

Sivanesan Vs The Inspector of Police

Psg College of Pharmacy, Vs The Pharmacy Council of India