Allowed

Ravichandran v. State Rep by

Madras HC28 Sept 2021CRL OP/17908/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras considered a bail application by Ravichandran in a criminal case involving alleged assault with an iron rod and attempt to murder. Finding the injured party discharged and noting the petitioner's incarceration duration, the Court granted bail subject to strict conditions including reporting and no tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is released on bail by executing a bond with two sureties on the condition of daily reporting and not tampering with evidence or witnesses.

Ravichandran Vs State Rep by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 28.09.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.17908 of 2021

¶6

Ravichandran ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The State represented by The Inspector of Police, ... Respondent Namagiripettai Police Station, Namakkal District, (Crime No.694 of 2021)

¶9

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C prayed to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Crime No.694 of 2021 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prabakaran

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath

¶12

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.06.2021 for the offences under Sections 294(b) and 307 of IPC, in Crime No.694 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶15

This is the third bail application filed before Court. The case of the prosecution is that there was previous enmity between the petitioner and the defacto complainant's husband, as a result of which, the petitioner along with other accused persons had abused the defacto complainant's husband and attacked him with iron rod and caused injuries. Hence, the complaint.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not involved in the offence and he has been falsely implicated. He further submits that he is in jail from 30.06.2021. Hence he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶17

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

¶18

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital and there is one previous case pending as against the petitioner. However, he vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶19

Considering the fact that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital and also considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶20

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing 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 learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Rasipuram, and on further condition that:

¶21

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

¶22

(b)the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

(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;

¶26

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

¶27

-sd/-

¶28

28/09/2021

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

¶33

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, RASIPURAM.

¶34

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT (FOR INFORMATION).

¶35

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NAMAGIRIPETTAI POLIE STATION, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT.

¶36

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶37

5 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, SALEM.

¶38

CC to M/S. C.PRABAKARAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶39

CRL OP.17908/2021

¶40

Date :28/09/2021

¶41

INBA 29/09/2021

¶42

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

Ravichandran v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravichandran 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

Abilash @ Sanjai Vs State Rep by

V.Mahalakshmi Vs the State Rep by

Ramesh @ Rameshkumar Vs State Rep by

Bakkiyaraj Vs Iop Dcb Villupuram

P.S.Jayalakshmi Vs Iop Asthampatti Ps Salem

Vijay Vs Iop Odiansalai Ps Puduchry