Allowed

Subramanian v. Inspector of Police

Madras HC12 Nov 2021CRL OP/21306/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a criminal case involving alleged affray and grievous hurt, noting the complainant received outpatient treatment and the petitioner had no prior criminal record, subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail on execution of bond with two sureties along with standard and specific conditions.

Subramanian Vs Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Friday, the Twelfth day of November Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V. THAMILSELVI

¶6

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.21306 of 2021

¶7

SUBRAMANIAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

¶8

¶9

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUTHUPETTAI POLICE STATION, TIRUVARUR DISTRICT. (CRIMW NO.2009 OF 2020)

¶10

For Petitioner : M/S. N.PALANIVEL Advocate

¶11

For Respondent : MR.N.S.SUGANTHAN, 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), 323 and 506 (ii) IPC in Cr.No.2009 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶15

2.The case of the prosecution is that owing of water stagnation on the recent rain in front of the defacto complainant's house, the defacto complainant filled sand in front of his house, due to that the water stagnation on the petitioner's house, there was a wordy quarrel between them. In this connection, the petitioner attacked the defacto complainant by using wooden log. Thereby, the defacto complainant sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint.

¶16

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

¶17

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submits that the injured person has been taken treatment as out patient and there is no previous case as against the petitioner.

¶18

Considering the fact that the injured person has been taken treatment as out patient and there is no previous case as against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioner.

¶19

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory 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, Tiruthuraipoondi 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 being a senior citizen shall report before the respondent police 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 anticipatory 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

12/11/2021

¶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, TIRUTHURAIPOONDI.

¶33

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

¶34

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THIRUVARUR [FOR INFORMATION]

¶35

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUTHUPETTAI POLICE STATION, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT.

¶36

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶37

+1CC to M/S. N.PALANIVEL Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.12675

¶38

CSK 17/11/2021

¶39

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

Subramanian v. Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subramanian v. Inspector of Police

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

Lakshmipathy Vs State Rep by

Vedanayagam Vs State Rep by

S.Palanisamy Vs State Rep by

Rajadurai Vs State Rep by

C.Manivannan Vs State by

Ramesh Vs State Rep by