Allowed

Chinrasu v. State Rep by

Madras HC6 Dec 2021CRL OP/23333/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to a petitioner charged with illegally transporting sand. The court considered the petitioner's voluntary offer to contribute Rs.30,000 to a charitable association and imposed strict conditions, including the actual deposit of the sum into the association's account and reporting restrictions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail on condition of executing a bond and depositing Rs.30,000 to a charitable association within two weeks.

Chinrasu Vs State Rep by — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 06.12.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.23333 of 2021

¶6

Chinrasu .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State Rep.By Inspector of Police Jedarpalayam Police Station, Namakkal District. (Crime No.360 of 2021) ...Respondent

¶9

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest or surrender in connection with the crime No.360 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Vetrivel

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.N.S.Suganthan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Section 379 of IPC in Crime No.360 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶14

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had transported four units of sand by using lorry without any valid licence. Hence, the complaint.

¶15

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution. However, on instructions, the learned counsel further submits that the petitioner, on his own volition, he is ready and willing to

¶16

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

¶17

contribute a sum of Rs.30,000/- to the credit of the Registered Advocate Clerks Association, Namakkal. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶18

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner by stating that petitioner had illegally transported four units of sand.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions made by the both counsel and also the fact that the petitioner has willfully and on his own volition agreed to contribute a sum of Rs.30,000/- for charitable purpose, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶20

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Paramathi, 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, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶21

[a] the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.30,000/(Rupees Thirty thousand only) to Registered Advocate Clerks Association, Namakkal , within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall produce the said receipt before the Court below.

¶22

[b] the petitioner and 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.

¶23

[c] the petitioner is directed to report before the respondent police on every Wednesday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and required for interrogation;

¶24

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶25

[e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶26

[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 has been

¶27

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

¶28

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];

¶29

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

¶30

-sd/-

¶31

06/12/2021

¶32

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

¶33

TRUE COPY

¶34

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.)

¶35

High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶36

¶37

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PARAMATHI, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT.

¶38

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NAMAKKAL DISTRICT. [FOR INFORMATION]

¶39

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, JEDARPALAYAM POLICE STATION, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT.

¶40

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶41

5 THE REGISTERED ADVOCATE CLERKS ASSOCIATION, NAMAKKAL.

¶42

CC to M/S.B.VETRIVEL Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶43

CRL OP.23333/2021

¶44

Date :06/12/2021 RW 27/12/2021

¶45

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

Chinrasu v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinrasu 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

Sathiyaraj Vs State Rep by

Mohammad Kamran Alias MD Chand Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Syed Mohamed Mohaideen Abdul Kader Vs the Union Territory of Puducherry

Poomani Vs State Rep by

Sathishkumar @ Sathish Vs State Rep.by

R.Ramesh Vs the State Rep by