Allowed

Chellamuthu v. the State Rep by

Madras HC21 Oct 2021CRL OP/17730/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal original petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner facing charges under IPC sections 294(b), 324, and 506(2). The Court was inclined to grant bail primarily because the injured person had been discharged from the hospital. Various conditions, including reporting daily and executing a bond, were imposed.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; petitioner ordered to execute a bond for Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and report to police daily for two weeks.

Chellamuthu Vs the State Rep by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Thursday, the Twenty First day of October Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.17730 of 2021

¶7

CHELLAMUTHU [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

¶8

¶9

THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, GUDIMANGALAM POLICE STATION, TIRUPPUR DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.674/2021)

¶10

For Petitioner : M/S.D.R.ARUN KUMAR Advocate

¶11

For Respondent : MR.A.GOPINATH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶12

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

¶13

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶14

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 324, 506(2) of IPC in Cr.No.674 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶15

2.The case of the prosecution is that out of the property dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant there were some altercation followed by quarrel in which the petitioner assaulted the defacto complainant's wife. Hence, the defacto complainant's wife sustained injuries. Thereby, the law enforcing agency registered a case against the petitioner.

¶16

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and the defacto complainant's wife had sustained only simple injuries. Hence, the learned counsel prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶17

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) submits that injured person has been discharged from the hospital.

¶18

Considering the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.2, Udumalpet, 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:

¶20

(a)the petitioner 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;

¶21

(b)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 interrogation;

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

(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]; and;

¶25

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

¶26

-sd/-

¶27

21/10/2021

¶28

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

¶29

TRUE COPY

¶30

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

¶31

¶32

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.2, UDUMALPET. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶33

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUPPUR [FOR INFORMATION]

¶34

3 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, GUDIMANGALAM POLICE STATION, TIRUPPUR DISTRICT.

¶35

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶36

+1CC to M/S.D.R.ARUN KUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.11554

¶37

CSK 28/10/2021

¶38

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

Chellamuthu v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chellamuthu v. the 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

M.Sankar Vs State Rep.by

Nanjundan Vs State Rep by

P.Barat Kumar Vs State by Its

R.Madhan Raja Vs the Inspector of Polilce

Southern Comfort Vs Abdul Rasheed Basudeen

Kennadi Vs the State Rep. by