Allowed

R. Ponnumari v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC18 Jun 2020CRL OP(MD)/6336/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner apprehending arrest in a murder case involving instigation, imposing conditions including personal appearance and a bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to appearance for interrogation, bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, and appearance within 15 days.

R. Ponnumari Vs the Inspector of Police — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.6336 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 18/06/2020

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.6336 of 2020

¶8

R. Ponnumari, ... Petitioner/Accused No.2

¶9

¶10

The State rep.by The Inspector of Police, M.Kallupatti Police Station, Madurai District. Crime No.21/2020.

¶11

... Respondent/Complainant

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr. D.Vijayaragavan,

¶13

Advocate.

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶15

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

¶16

PRAYER :-

¶17

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime no.21 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

¶18

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶19

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

¶20

The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 324, 506(II) and 302 of IPC., and Section 4 of TNWH Act, in Crime No.21 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶21

3.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, who is A2, induced A1 to attack the wife of de-facto complainant, due to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ civil dispute. Subsequently, A1 attacked the deceased with wooden

¶22

1/3

¶23

CRL OP(MD). No.6336 of 2020

¶24

stick and due to the injuries, she died in the hospital, after three days.

¶25

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and she did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution.

¶26

5.The learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for the State, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner instigated her son to assault the deceased. Due to which, the deceased sustained injuries and subsequently, she died in the hospital, after three days.

¶27

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the overt act attributed against the petitioner that the petitioner only instigated A1 to assault the deceased, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶28

(i) Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Usilampatti and on her 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;

¶29

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent, as and when required, for interrogation.

¶30

(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

¶31

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

¶32

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.

¶33

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

¶34

/ /2020

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

2/3

¶38

CRL OP(MD). No.6336 of 2020

¶39

¶40

THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, USILAMPATTI.

¶41

DO THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT.

¶42

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, M.KALLUPATTI POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT.

¶43

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

¶44

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.6336 of 2020 Date :18/06/2020 skn/mpk AE/PN/SAR-III (23.06.2020) 3P 5C

¶45

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

¶46

3/3

R. Ponnumari v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R. Ponnumari 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

Vijay Vs State Rep by

M.Gurunathan Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

Prathap Vs The Inspector of Police

Arunachalam Vs The Inspector of Police

Sundaramoorthy Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

R.Rajthilak Vs The Inspector of Police