Allowed

Ramesh @ Rameshkumar v. State Rep by

Madras HC27 Sept 2021CRL OP/17121/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Madras granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, an accused in a case alleging public nuisance and voluntarily causing hurt. The bail was subject to bond, reporting to police, and strict conditions regarding surrender by a specified date. Breach could lead to automatic cancellation of the order.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail with bond of Rs. 10,000, two sureties, daily reporting to police, and strict conditions including surrender within 15 days.

Ramesh @ Rameshkumar Vs State Rep by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Monday, the Twenty Seventh day of September Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.17121 of 2021

¶7

RAMESH @ RAMESHKUMAR

¶8

[ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

¶9

¶10

STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERALAM POLICE STATION, TIRUVARUR DISTRICT (CRIME NO.964/2021)

¶11

For Petitioner : M/S T.MURUGANANTHAM Advocate

¶12

For Respondent : M/S. C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶13

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

¶14

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶15

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 323 & 506(i) of I.P.C in Cr.No.964 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶16

2.The case of the prosecution is that the De-facto Complainant who is incharge for construction of temple in the village, convened a meeting and asked each of the family in the village to pay a sum of Rs.5000/-. When the petitioner refused to pay the said amount, a wordy quarrel arose between the Petitioners and the De-facto Complaint and in that scuffle, the De-facto had suffered injuries. Hence the complaint.

¶17

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶18

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation is pending in this case and the injured has been discharged from the hospital.

¶19

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

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case that the

¶21

injured has been discharged from the hospital, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶22

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail and he

¶23

is ordered to be released on bail 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, Nannilam on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) 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:

¶24

(a)if the petitioner failed to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

¶25

(b)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

¶27

(d) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶28

(e)the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶29

(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]; and;

¶30

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

¶31

-sd/-

¶32

27/09/2021

¶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

¶38

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NANNILAM , TIRUVARUR DISTRICT 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUVARUR [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERALAM POLICE STATION, TIRUVARUR DISTRICT 4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS. CC to M/S T.MURUGANANTHAM Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶39

CRL OP.17121/2021 Date :27/09/2021 APN 07/10/2021

¶40

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

Ramesh @ Rameshkumar v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh @ Rameshkumar 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

P.John Vs the State Rep.by Its

R.Manivannan Vs the State Rep by

Raj Shekar @Rajasekar Vs State Rep by

S.Ramamoorthy Vs the Inspector of Police

Rajendran Vs State Rep by

Bhuvanesh Vs the State Rep by