Partly allowed

Panjavarnam v. State Represented by

Madras HC18 Mar 2021CRL MP/3084/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two criminal miscellaneous petitions, the bench modified a condition in an earlier anticipatory bail order regarding police reporting frequency and extended the time given to the petitioner to execute sufficient bail sureties.

What did the court decide?

Modified condition to require reporting every day for two weeks and then weekly; extended two weeks for surrender and execution of sureties.

Panjavarnam Vs State Represented by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Thursday, the Eighteenth day of March Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.3084 & 3086 of 2021

¶7

IN CRL OP.15080/2020

¶8

PANJAVARNAM [PETITIONER IN BOTH THE PETITIONS]

¶9

¶10

STATE REPRESENTED BY [RESPONDENT IN BOTH THE PETITIONS] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

¶11

VIKKIRAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, ARIYALUR.

¶12

(CRIME NO.324/2020)

¶13

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to grant the extension of time to execute the order in Crl.O.P.No.15080 /2020 order dated 06.10.2020. (Crl.M.P.No.3084/2021)

¶14

(i) To modify the condition (b) imposed in Crl.O.P.No.15080/2020 order dated 06.10.2020. The petitioners on her release from prison, shall stay at Trichy and report before the Trichy cantonment Police Station daily at 10.30 am until further orders. The petitioner shall not enter into the jurisdictional limits of the respondent police until further orders. (Crl.M.P.No.3086/2021)

¶15

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.R.SUBRAMANIYAN, Advocate for the petitioner, [IN BOTH THE PETITIONS] and of M/S.T.SHUNMUGARAJESWARAN, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side) on behalf of the Respondent, [IN BOTH THE PETITIONS] the court made the following order:-

¶16

The petition in Crl.M.P.No.3086 of 2021 has been filed to modify the condition 6(b) imposed on the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.15080 of 2020, dated 06.10.2020 and the petition in Crl.M.P.No.3084 of 2021 has been filed for extension of time to comply with the conditions.

¶17

The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide Crl.O.P.No.15080 of 2020 by order dated 06.10.2020 however, there is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ some inadvertent mistake has crept in paragraph 6(b) of the order

¶18

wherein, it is wrongly stated that “the petitioner on her release from prison, shall stay at Trichy and report before the Trichy Cantonment Police Station daily at 10.3. a.m. until further orders. The petitioner shall not enter into the jurisdictional limits of the respondent police until further orders” and thereby, when the petitioner had approached the Court to execute sureties, it was not accepted. Hence, he seeks for appropriate orders.

¶19

3.Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police.

¶20

In view of the above facts and submissions of the learned Counsels, the condition in paragraph 6(b) in Crl.O.P.No.15080 of 2020 dated 06.10.2020, is modified to the effect that the petitioner shall report before the respondent everyday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter, every Monday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

¶21

A further period of two weeks time is extended from the date on which the order copy is made ready, to surrender and execute sureties.

¶22

-sd/18/03/2021

¶23

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶24

TRUE COPY

¶25

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104. TO

¶26

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.I, JAYAKONDAM.

¶27

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ARIYALUR. [FOR INFORMATION]

¶28

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶29

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIKKIRAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, ARIYALUR.

¶30

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

¶31

5 THE OFFICER INCHARGE TRICHY CANTONMENT POLICE STATION, TRICHY.

¶32

+1 C.C. to M/S.R.SUBRAMANIYAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.3549

¶33

Order in CRL MP.3084 & 3086/2021 in CRL OP.15080/2020 Date :18/03/2021 From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format TA-22/03/2021

¶34

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

Panjavarnam v. State Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Panjavarnam v. State Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Martin Roberts Vs State Rep by

R.Devadoss Vs State Rep. by

M/S.Pgc Corporation Ltd. Vs the State Rep.by Its

Rakki @ Balaji Vs the State Rep by

V. Sankar Vs State Rep by

Kanthasamy Vs the State