Allowed

Ravikumar v. State Rep. by

Madras HC27 Jan 2021CRL OP/1004/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras considered an anticipatory bail petition filed by a lorry owner and driver apprehending arrest for illegally transporting granite. The court granted bail subject to a security deposit of Rs. 10,000 and various other conditions regarding reporting and tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to deposit of Rs. 10,000, execution of bond with sureties, and reporting to police for two weeks.

Ravikumar Vs State Rep. by — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 27.01.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. BHARATHIDASAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.1004 of 2021

¶6

Ravikumar 2. Rajesh ... Petitioners Vs. The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Kandhikuppam Police Station Krishnagiri District. (Crime No.470 of 2020) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No. 470 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the Respondent.

¶7

For Petitioners : Mr.E.Kannadasan For Respondent : Mr.S.Karthikeyan Addl. Public Prosecutor O R D E R (The case has been heard through video conference)

¶8

The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 379 of I.P.C. in Crime No. 470 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, and now, they have filed this petition seeking to grant anticipatory bail.

¶9

The case of the prosecution is that the 2^nd petitioner is the owner and 1^st petitioner is the driver of the lorry. On the date of occurrence, while the respondent police conducting routine vehicle checkup at Kandhikuppam village junction road, they found that the petitioners said to have illegally transported 1 no. of granite stone in a lorry without having valid license. Hence, the criminal case has been registered against the petitioners. Now, apprehending arrest, the present petition has been filed seeking for anticipatory bail.

¶10

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

¶11

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they are no way connected with the offence. He would submit that the petitioners, being driver and owner of a lorry, they have been falsely implicated as accused in this case. On instruction, he would further submit that without prejudice to their rights and contentions, they are prepared to deposit/pay some considerable amount to any charitable organization or association and prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶12

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that the 2^nd petitioner is the owner and 1^st petitioner is the driver of a lorry and they have transported 1 no. of granite stone illegally without having valid bills. He has further submitted that there is no previous case pending against the petitioners. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶13

In order to curb the illegal transportation of granite stone and taking into consideration of the voluntary submission made by the petitioners offering to deposit or to pay considerable amount to any charitable organization or association, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners may be directed to deposit/pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the Madras High Court Advocates Clerks Welfare Association, High Court of Madras, Indian Bank, High Court Branch, A/c.No.484077244 IFSC.No. IDIB000M157, without prejudice to their rights and contentions before the trial Court.

¶14

Merely, because the petitioners have deposited the said amount, it would not amount to admission of their guilt. Therefore, it is open to the trial Court to deal with the case independently.

¶15

Taking note of the facts and circumstances and also considering the fact that there is no previous antecedents against the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions :-

¶16

(a) The petitioners are directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand only) either through RTGS/NEFT or in cash in favour of Madras High Court Advocates Clerks Welfare Association, High Court of Madras, Indian Bank, High Court Branch, A/c.No.484077244 IFSC.No. IDIB000M157, within fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest or their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Krishnagiri, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further

¶17

condition that:

¶18

[b] the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the respondent/police may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

¶19

[c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for the period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.

¶20

[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶21

[e] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶22

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]

¶23

[g] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

¶24

With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.

¶25

-sd/-

¶26

27/01/2021

¶27

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

¶28

TRUE COPY

¶29

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

¶30

¶31

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO I, KRISHNAGIRI.

¶32

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT[FOR INFORMATION].

¶33

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶34

HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶35

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

¶36

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANDHIKUPPAM POLICE STATION, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT.

¶37

5 MADRAS HIGH COURT ADVOCATES CLERKS WELFARE ASSOCIATION, HIGH COURT OF MADRAS, INDIAN BANK, HIGH COURT BRANCH, A/C NO.484077244, IFSC NO.IDIB000M157.

¶38

CC to M/S. E.KANNADASAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶39

CRL OP.1004/2021
Date :27/01/2021
ksm10/02/2021

¶40

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

Ravikumar v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravikumar 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Selvam Vs State Rep by

A.Gopi Vs State Rep by

Yuvaraj Vs the State Rep.by

Arivazhagan @ Arivu Vs State by

L.Murugasamy Vs State Rep by

Iyyappan Vs State Represented by