Allowed

Arumugam v. State Rep. by

Madras HC3 Feb 2021CRL OP/1007/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras granted anticipatory bail to petitioners facing arrest for illegal transportation of granite stones. The court imposed conditions including execution of a bond, reporting requirements, and an undertaking not to tamper with evidence or abscond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail in event of arrest by executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties and complying with prescribed conditions.

Arumugam Vs State Rep. by — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 03.02.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. BHARATHIDASAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.1007 of 2021

¶6

Arumugam
2. Prakash ... Petitioners

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
Bargur Police Station,
Krishnagiri District.
(Crime No.523 of 2021) ... Respondent

¶9

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner on in the event of their arrest concerned in Crime No.523 of 2021, on the file of the Inspector of Police, Bargur Police Station, Krishnagiri District.

¶10

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

¶11

The petitioners, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Section 379, of IPC, in Crime No.523 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶12

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners had transported granite stones illegally by using a vehicle, without any valid licence. Hence, the complaint.

¶13

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners

¶14

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

¶15

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that the the petitioners had transported granite stones illegally by using a vehicle, without any valid licence. He further submitted that there are no previous case pending against the petitioner.

¶16

Taking into consideration, the facts and circumstances of the case and there is no previous case pending against the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with the following conditions.

¶17

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate no.1, Krishnagiri, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a 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 the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶18

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

¶19

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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

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

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

-sd/-
03/02/2021
This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried
into execution by all concerned
TRUE COPY
Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.)
High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I,
KRISHNAGIRI.
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
KRISHNAGIRI [FOR INFORMATION]
3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
BARGUR POLICE STATION,
KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT.
CC to M/S. E.KANNADASAN Advocate on payment of necessary
charges
CRL OP.1007/2021
Date :03/02/2021
MK:19/02/2021

¶27

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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Elayaraja Vs State Rep by

Neelambari Vs the State Rep by

K.Kumar Vs State Rep.by

E.Ragunath Vs State Rep.by

Srinivasan Vs State Rep.by

Selvam Vs State Rep by