Manikandan v. State Rep by
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court of Madras granted bail to fifth accused in a criminal case involving enmity and alleged assault with weapons, noting false implication and lack of specific overt acts.
What did the court decide?
Petitioner released on bail on Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions including daily reporting, non-absconding, and non-tampering with evidence or witnesses.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 04.02.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
Crl.O.P.No.1430 of 2021
Manikandan ... Petitioner
Vs.
State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, F-5 Choolaimedu Police Station, Chennai. (Crime No.20/2011) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.20 of 2021, on the file of respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr. P.Rajkumar For Respondent : Mr.M. Prabavathi, APP O R D E R (The case has been heard through video conference) Petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 18.01.2021 for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 294(a), 324, 307 and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.20 of 2021, seeks bail.
- Totally there are 5 accused in this case and the petitioner is A5. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, all the accused alleged to have waylaid the defacto complainant and attacked him with knife and wooden log and caused serious injuries. Hence, a case has been registered against the petitioner and others.
- The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner in innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case and his name is not found place in the First Information Report and no specific overtact has been attributed as against the petitioner. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to an accused falsely implicated based on co-accused confession without specific overt acts attributed.
Whether the conditions of bail and reporting requirements are appropriate in the present case.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Manikandan
- respondent
State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, F-5 Choolaimedu Police Station, Chennai
Coram
V.BHARATHIDASAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court