Partly allowed

V.Madhavan v. State Rep by

Madras HC25 Aug 2021CRL MP/8328/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court considered a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking relaxation of the daily reporting condition imposed in a previous anticipatory bail order. It allowed the prayer, modifying the petitioner's appearance requirement to only appear when summoned for interrogation.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner shall appear before the police only as and when required for interrogation on receipt of summons; all other conditions remain unaltered.

V.Madhavan Vs State Rep by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Wednesday, the Twenty Fifth day of August Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.8328 of 2021

¶7

IN CRL OP.11556/2021

¶8

V.MADHAVAN [ PETITIONER ]

¶9

¶10

STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THITTACHERY POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT (CRIME NO.586/2021)

¶11

[ RESPONDENT ]

¶12

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to relax the condition (c) imposed by this Honble Court in Crl.O.P.No.11556/2021 dated 06.07.2021 in Crime No.586/2021 on the condition that the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30am until further orders by this Honble Court

¶13

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 P.CHINNADURAI, Advocate for the petitioner and of M/S. A.GOPINATH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) on behalf of the Respondents the court made the following order:-

¶14

Vide Order dated 06.07.2021, this Court had enlarged the petitioner on anticipatory bail on certain conditions. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking relaxation of the conditions.

¶15

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

¶16

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

Accordingly, the condition insofar as appearance as imposed by order dated 06.07.2021 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

25/08/2021

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

¶24

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.II, NAGAPATTINAM

¶25

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NAGAPATTINAM [FOR INFORMATION]

¶26

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶27

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THITTACHERY POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT

¶28

+1 C.C. to M/S P.CHINNADURAI Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.No.9216

¶29

Order

¶30

in CRL MP.8328/2021 in CRL OP.11556/2021 Date :25/08/2021

¶31

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

¶32

APN 09/09/2021

¶33

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

V.Madhavan v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Madhavan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Rajkumar Impex Pvt., Ltd., Vs M/S.Exide Industries Ltd.

Selvam Vs State Rep by

Madheshwaran Vs the State Rep. by

Jaishankar Vs the Inspector of Police

G.Rangasamy Vs State Rep.by

S.Vijayalakshmi Vs Abisheik Jain