Allowed

Vinoth Kumar v. State Rep by

Madras HC10 Dec 2021CRL OP/24166/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the petitioner arrested and in judicial custody for offences under Sections 294(b), 324, and 307 IPC, considering the period of incarceration and change in medical condition of the victim, subject to bond and conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail executing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and depositing Rs.5,000 non-refundably, subject to specified reporting and conduct conditions.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 10.12.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

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

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.24166 of 2021

¶6

Vinoth Kumar ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Arani Taluk Police Station (Crime No.1056 of 2021)

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C prayed to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.1056 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Shanmugam

¶12

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

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.09.2021 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 324 and 307 IPC, in Crime No.1056 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶15

The case of the prosecution is that there was a money dispute between the victim and A1 due to which, A1 along with other accused attacked the victim 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 the petitioner has been suffering incarceration from 04.09.2021. He would further submit that coaccused has been released on bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.17835 of 2021 dated 27.09.2021 and that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay a substantial amount to any charitable institute as may be directed by this Court without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court and he would pray 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 some of the co-accused have been released on bail by this Court. However, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶19

In view of the submissions made by both the Counsels and the fact that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital and some of the co-accused have been granted bail by this Court 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-I, Thiruvannamalai, and on further conditions that:

¶21

(a) the petitioner shall make non-refundable deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only), through demand draft to the Registered Advocate Clerks Association, Arani, without prejudice to his defence before the trial Court and the learned Judicial Magistrate, after perusing the challan/ receipt, shall accept the sureties furnished by the petitioners;

¶22

(b)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

(b)the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Tuesday and Sunday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

(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;

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

-sd/-

¶30

10/12/2021

¶31

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

¶32

TRUE COPY

¶33

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

¶34

High Court, Madras - 600 104. TO

¶35

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.I, THIRUVANNAMALAI

¶36

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THIRUVANNAMALAI. [FOR INFORMATION]

¶37

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶38

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARANI TALUK POLICE STATION, THIRUVANNAMALAI.

¶39

5 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, VELLORE.

¶40

6 THE REGISTERED ADVOCATE CLERK ASSOCIATION, ARANI.

¶41

+1 CC to M/S. T.SHANMUGAM Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.14519

¶42

CRL OP.24166/2021 Date :10/12/2021

¶43

TA-10/12/2021

¶44

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

Vinoth Kumar v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinoth Kumar 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

Sakthivel Vs State Rep by

B.Veeramani Vs the State Repby

Ponmani Vs State Rep.by

N.K.Jinnah Vs the State

Audi Munusamy Vs Income Tax Officer

Karuna@Karunambigai Vs State Rep by