Allowed

K.Hemakumar v. State Rep by

Madras HC3 Jul 2021CRL OP/13172/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners facing arrest under various IPC sections and the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, noting no physical injury was sustained by the complainant. Bail was subject to stringent conditions including reporting, no tampering, and a bond of Rs. 10,000.

What did the court decide?

Order released on bail on appearance/arrest within 15 days upon executing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and complying with daily reporting and other conditions.

K.Hemakumar Vs State Rep by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Friday, the Thirtieth day of July Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.13172 of 2021

¶6

1 K.HEMAKUMAR [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] (*)2 K.LAKSHMINARAYANAN @ SURESH SON OF KAMALANATHAN

3 K.DURGA SHANKAR

4 R.MAGESHWARI

5 S.RAGHUPATHY

Vs [ RESPONDENT ]

STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, R-8, VADAPALANI POLICE STATION, VADAPALANI, CHENNAI-600 026 (CR.NO.630/2021)

¶12

For Petitioner : M/S.R.THANGAMANI Advocate

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶14

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

¶15

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶16

The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 269, 270, 271, 278, 294b and 506(1) of I.P.C. and (*) section 3 of Epidemic Diseases Act 1897 provision in Cr.No.630 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶17

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are alleged to have given mental torture, harassed and threatened the defacto complainant.

¶18

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and that they have been falsely implicated in the case.

¶19

4.The learned Government Advocate submitted that no one sustained injury.

¶20

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

¶21

5.Considering the fact that no one sustained injury, this Court

¶22

is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶23

6.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail

¶24

in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Saidapet, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each, with two sureties each 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:

¶25

(a)the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

¶26

(b)the petitioners 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 interrogation;

¶27

(c)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶28

(d)the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶29

(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 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]; and;

¶30

(f)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

¶31

-sd/-

¶32

30/07/2021

¶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

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

¶37

(*)AMENDED AS PER ORDER OF THIS COURT DATED 25/08/2021 MADE IN CRL.MP.No.8296 OF 2021 in CRL.O.P.No.13172 OF 2021.

¶38

¶39

1 THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, SAIDAPET, CHENNAI.

¶40

2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI.

¶41

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, R-8, VADAPALANI POLICE STATION, VADAPALANI, CHENNAI-600 026

¶42

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶43

+1 CC to M/S.R.THANGAMANI Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO. 9253

¶44

CRL OP.13172/2021 Date :30/07/2021 RW 05/08/2021 RW 15/09/2021

¶45

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

K.Hemakumar v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Hemakumar 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

Kumar Vs State by

Ketha Chalapathi Babu Vs State Rep by

Shri Anil Kumar Ojha, Vs the Assistant Commissioner of

Kakkan Selvakumar Vs the Superintendent of Police

G.Arumugam Vs Smt.Lydia Devakirubai

Veeranna Vs the Superintendent of Police