Allowed

L.Murugasamy v. State Rep by

Madras HC27 Jan 2021CRL OP/1134/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, an alleged owner of a lorry, in a case involving illegal transport of cravel sand under IPC 379. Bail was subject to conditioning the petitioner to deposit Rs. 15,000 with a welfare association, execute a bond with sureties, and report daily initially.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to deposit of Rs. 15,000, execution of bail bond, and compliance with reporting and conduct conditions.

L.Murugasamy Vs State Rep by — Anticipatory Bail | 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.1134 of 2021

L.Murugasamy

... Petitioner

Vs.

The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Avinashi Police Station Tiruppur District.

¶10

(Crime No.1874 of 2020) ... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No. 1874 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the Respondent.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar

¶13

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

¶14

The petitioner is arrayed as A2. He apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 379 of I.P.C., in Crime No. 1874 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, and now, he has filed this petition seeking to grant anticipatory bail.

¶15

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is a owner of the Tipper lorry. On the date of occurrence, while the respondent police was in routine vehicle checkup, they found that the 1^st accused said to have transported 3 unit of cravel sand in a Tipper lorry without having valid license. Hence, the criminal case has been registered against the petitioner.

¶16

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

¶17

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he is no way connected with the offence. He would submit that the 1^st accused without knowledge of the petitioner taken the vehicle and used it. He would submit that the petitioner is using the said vehicle for the agricultural purposes only. He would submit that the petitioner being owner of a Tipper lorry, he has been falsely implicated as accused in this case. On instruction, he would further submit that without prejudice to his right and contentions, he is prepared to deposit/pay some considerable amount to any charitable organization or association and prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶18

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner is the owner of a Tipper lorry, in which, 3 unit of cravel sand was transported illegally without having valid license. He has further submitted that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶19

In order to curb the illegal transportation of cravel sand and taking into consideration of the voluntary submission made by the petitioner offering to deposit or to pay considerable amount to any charitable organization or association, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner may be directed to deposit/pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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 his right and contention before the trial Court.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

(a) The petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/(Rupees Fifteen 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 petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest or his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Avinashi, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) 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, and on further condition that:

¶23

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

¶24

[b] the petitioner 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.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

[f] 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 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]

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

-sd/-

¶32

27/01/2021

¶33

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

¶34

TRUE COPY

¶35

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

¶36

¶37

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, AVINASHI.

¶38

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUPPUR [FOR INFORMATION]

¶39

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶40

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AVINASHI POLICE STATION, TIRUPPUR DISTRICT. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶41

5 THE MADRAS HIGH COURT ADVOCATES CLERKS WELFARE ASSOCIATION, HIGH COURT OF MADRAS, INDIAN BANK, HIGH COURT BRANCH,

¶42

A/c.No.484077244 IFSC.No. IDIB000M157,

¶43

CC to M/S.S.VINOTH KUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶44

Date :27/01/2021 MK:04/02/2021

¶45

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

L.Murugasamy v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L.Murugasamy 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

Ravikumar Vs State Rep. by

Iyyappan Vs State Represented by