Allowed

Alukkukumar @ Saikumar v. the State Rep. by

Madras HC13 Aug 2021CRL MP/7680/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal miscellaneous petition sought relaxation of the daily reporting condition imposed on bail. The court allowed the petition, modifying the condition to appearance only upon summons while keeping other conditions unchanged.

What did the court decide?

The daily reporting condition imposed by the order dated 15.06.2021 was modified to require appearance only as and when required for interrogation on receipt of summons.

Alukkukumar @ Saikumar Vs the State Rep. by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Friday, the Thirteenth day of August Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.7680 of 2021

¶7

IN CRL OP.10319/2021

¶8

1 ALUKKUKUMAR @ SAIKUMAR [ PETITIONERS ]

2 KARTHIKEYAN

3 JEGADEESAN

THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTUR POLICE STATION, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT. CRIME NO.516 OF 2021

¶13

[ RESPONDENT ]

¶14

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein the High Court will be pleased to relax the condition that the petitioners shall report before the respondent police every day at 10.30 a.m. until further orders imposed on the petitioners in Crl.OP.No.10319/2021 dated 15.06.2021.

¶15

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.SWAMISUBRAMANIAN, Advocate for the petitioner and of MR. C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶16

Vide Order dated 15.06.2021, this Court had enlarged the petitioners on bail on certain conditions. This petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking relaxation of the conditions.

¶17

Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent, on instruction, submits that the petitioners has been complying with the conditions without fail.

¶18

In view of the above submission, this Court is of the considered view that the prayer as sought for by the petitioners could be acceded to.

¶19

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

¶20

Accordingly, the condition insofar as appearance as imposed by order dated 15.06.2021 alone stands modified and the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation on receipt of summons. All other conditions remain unaltered.

¶21

-sd/-

¶22

13/08/2021

¶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.

¶26

¶27

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, MANNARGUDI.

¶28

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT (FOR INFORMATION).

¶29

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTUR POLICE STATION, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT.

¶30

4 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, DISTRICT MINERAL FOUNDATION TRUST, THIRUVARUR.

¶31

5 THE MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT / AUTHORISED OFFICER, GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL, THIRUVARUR OF COVID-19 PATIENTS.

¶32

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

¶33

6 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶34

C.C. to M/S.SWAMISUBRAMANIAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶35

Order in CRL MP.7680/2021 in CRL OP.10319/2021 Date :13/08/2021

¶36

From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format

¶37

INBA 31/08/2021

¶38

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

Alukkukumar @ Saikumar v. the State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alukkukumar @ Saikumar v. the State Rep. 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

M.Loganathan Vs the Inspector of Police

A.Rajendran Vs State Rep by

Ayyappan Vs State by

C.K.Nandhakumar, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Mrs.Uma, Vs The Director General of Police

Veeramanikandan Vs State Rep by