Partly allowed

Arumugam v. State Rep by

Madras HC23 Aug 2021CRL MP/7932/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous petition, the petitioner sought relaxation of a bail condition requiring daily reporting to the police. Upon hearing arguments, the Court allowed the prayer, modifying the condition to appear only upon receiving a summons for interrogation. All other bail conditions remain unaltered.

What did the court decide?

The condition for daily reporting is modified to require appearance only upon receipt of a summons for interrogation; other conditions remain unaltered.

Arumugam Vs State Rep by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Monday, the Twenty Third day of August Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.7932 of 2021

¶7

IN CRL OP.10881/2021

¶8

ARUMUGAM

¶9

[ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

¶10

¶11

STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNARGUDI TOWN POLICE STATION, TIRUVARUR DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.1146/2021)

¶12

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein the High Court will be pleased to relax the condition that the petitioner shall report before the Respondent police daily at 10.30 A.M until further orders imposed on the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.10881/2021 dated 25.06.2021.

¶13

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. A.GOPINATH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶14

Vide Order dated 25.06.2021, this Court had enlarged the petitioner on bail on certain conditions. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking relaxation of the conditions.

¶15

2.Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents, on instruction, submits that the petitioner had been complying with the conditions without fail.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

4.Accordingly, the condition insofar as appearance as imposed by order dated 25.06.2021 alone stands modified and the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation on receipt of summons. All other conditions remain unaltered.

¶19

-sd/-

¶20

23/08/2021

¶21

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

¶22

TRUE COPY

¶23

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

¶24

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, MANNARGUDI.

¶25

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

¶26

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶27

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNARGUDI TOWN POLICE STATION, TIRUVARUR DISTRICT.

¶28

5 THE CHAIRMAN / DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DISTRICT MINERAL FOUNDATION TRUST, THIRUVARUR.

¶29

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

Order

in CRL MP.7932/2021

in CRL OP.10881/2021

Date :23/08/2021

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

¶35

INBA 06/09/2021

¶36

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

Arumugam v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arumugam v. 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

R.Satheesh Kumar Vs Inspector of Police

Gunaseelan Vs State Rep.by

Moorthy Vs State Rep by

Arumugam Vs State Rep. by

Kathirvel Vs the State Rep. by

Kalal@Chandrasekaran Vs the State Rep.by