Partly allowed

Mangilal@Mongilal v. State Rep by

Madras HC26 Aug 2021CRL MP/8350/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras extended the time granted to the petitioner to comply with the conditions of an earlier anticipatory bail order by a further period of two weeks, finding the reasons shown in the affidavit satisfactory.

What did the court decide?

Time extended by a further period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order for the petitioner to comply with the conditions of the earlier bail order.

Mangilal@Mongilal Vs State Rep by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Thursday, the Twenty Sixth day of August Two Thousand Twenty One

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.8350 of 2021

¶6

IN CRL.O.P.No.16808 of 2020

¶7

MANGILAL @ MONGILAL [ PETITIONER ]

¶8

¶9

STATE REP BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VELLORE NORTH POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.2057/2020)

¶10

[ RESPONDENT ]

¶11

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to further extension of Time of the order to comply with orders of this Hon`ble Court made in Crl.O.P.No.16808 of 2020 dated 05.11.2020.

¶12

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. G.VINODHKUMAR, Advocate for the petitioner, and of MR.A.GOPINATH, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) on behalf of the Respondent, the court made the following order:-

¶13

Vide Order dated 05.11.2020, this Court had granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner on certain conditions. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking extension of time to comply with the conditions.

¶14

Being satisfied with the reasons shown in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the prayer sought for by the petitioner deserves to be considered favourably.

¶15

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

¶16

Accordingly, time is extended by a further period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order for the petitioner to comply with the conditions. All other conditions remain unaltered.

¶17

-sd/-

¶18

26/08/2021

¶19

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

¶20

TRUE COPY

¶21

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

¶22

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.IV, VELLORE.

¶23

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VELLORE. [FOR INFORMATION]

¶24

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶25

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VELLORE NORTH POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT.

¶26

5 THE CANCER INSTITUTE (WIA) (REGIONAL CANCER CENTRE) ADYAR, CHENNAI-600 020. BEARING A/C.NO.149710011005477, ANDHRA BANK, MADHYA KAILASH BRANCH.

¶27

+1 C.C. to M/S. G.VINODHKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.9138 Order

¶28

in CRL MP.8350/2021 in CRL OP.16808/2020 Date :26/08/2021

¶29

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

¶30

TA-14/09/2021

¶31

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

Mangilal@Mongilal v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mangilal@Mongilal 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

V.Madhavan Vs State Rep by

Kaviyarasu Vs State Rep by

Chandrappa Vs the State Rep.by

P.Lakshmi Vs State Represented by

Sri Venkateshwara Raj Vs the Superintendent of Police

Jeganathan Tennis Missier Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police