Allowed

Jaikumar v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC23 Jun 2020CRL OP(MD)/6245/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case involving cheating and forgery offences, subject to conditions regarding appearance before the magistrate and execution of a bond.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with conditions: release on bond with sureties, monthly court appearances, and consequences for breach including dismissal of petition or fresh FIR in case of absconding.

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

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.6245 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 23/06/2020

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.6245 of 2020

¶8

R.Jaikumar ... Petitioner/Accused

¶9

¶10

The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Thondi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. (in Crime No.270 of 2012) ... Respondent/Complainant

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Lawrance, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.V.Neelakandan, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶12

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

¶13

PRAYER :-

¶14

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.270 of 2012 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 Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

¶17

2.The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 380 IPC @ 424, 380, 409, 201 of I.P.C., in Crime No.270 of 2012, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶18

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the above said case.

¶19

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that charge sheet has already been filed and the case has been taken on file in C.C.No.31 of 2019, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Thiruvadanai and the case is posted on 10.07.2020.

¶20

1/3

¶21

CRL OP(MD). No.6245 of 2020

¶22

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions:-

¶23

(i) Accordingly, petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvadanai, Ramanathapuram District, and on his executing 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 learned Magistrate concerned;

¶24

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate Court on first working day of every month.

¶25

(iii)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 imposed 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

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

¶27

7.The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed.

¶28

8.The petitioner shall comply with the conditions stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C scrupulously.

¶29

sd/-

¶30

23/06/2020 / TRUE COPY /

¶31

/ /2020

¶32

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

¶33

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utlised 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

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

¶35

2/3

¶36

CRL OP(MD). No.6245 of 2020

¶37

¶38

THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUVADANAI, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶39

DO-THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶40

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THONDI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶41

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

¶42

MS/PN/SAR-2/25.06.2020/3P.5C

¶43

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

¶44

3/3

Jaikumar v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaikumar 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

Santhosh Vs State Rep by

Muthukumar Vs State Rep.by

Sathish Kumar Vs State Rep. by

P.Mary Thomas Vs State Rep by

Arjunan Vs the State Rep by Its

D.Lakshmanan Vs the State Rep by