Allowed

K.Lakshmanan v. State Rep by

Madras HC17 Dec 2021CRL OP/24868/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Madras granted bail to the petitioner accused of murder, ICPO 341, 147, 148, 324, 302 IPC, considering co-accused were on bail and his period of incarceration, subject to conditions including daily police appearance.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with bond for ₹10,000 and two sureties for like amount, subject to conditions including daily appearance before police.

K.Lakshmanan Vs State Rep by — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17.12.2021 CORAM:

¶2

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶3

Crl.O.P.No.24868 of 2021

¶4

K.Lakshmanan ...Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

State rep. By Inspector of Police, E-1, Mylapore Police Station, Chennai – 600 004 Crime No.1019 of 2021 ...Respondent

¶7

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in the case in Crime No.1019 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police.

¶8

For Petitioner : M/s.C.H.Vinobha Gandhi

¶9

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

¶10

ORDER

¶11

The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 18.09.2021 for the offences under Sections 341, 147, 148, 324, 302 of IPC in Crime No.1019 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶12

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with the other accused is alleged to have committed murder of the deceased. Hence, the law enforcing agency registered a case against the petitioner and other accused.

¶13

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the co-accused were already enlarged on bail. He furthermore submits that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration from 18.09.2021. Hence, he seeks for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶14

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

¶15

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that this is the 3^rd bail application filed by the petitioner and this Court has already dismissed the earlier bail applications filed by the petitioner. Further he also did not dispute the fact that the co accused were already enlarged on bail. However, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶16

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, since the co-accused were already enlarged on bail, considering the change of circumstance pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶17

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 XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet and on further conditions that:

¶18

(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;

¶19

(b) the petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m until further orders;

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

(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;

¶23

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

¶24

-sd/-

¶25

17/12/2021

¶26

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

¶27

TRUE COPY

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

¶31

1 XVIII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT, SAIDAPET, CHENNAI

¶32

2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI(FOR INFORMATION)

¶33

3 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, E-1, MYLAPORE POLICE STATION, CHENNAI 600004

¶34

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶35

5 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL, CHENNAI

¶36

CC to M/S.C.H.VINOBHA GANDHI Advocate on payment of necessary charges Sr.15068

¶37

CRL OP.24868/2021 Date :17/12/2021 RVR 20/12/2021

¶38

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

K.Lakshmanan v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Lakshmanan 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

K.Rangadurai Vs The District collector

M/s.Hyfa Catering Vs The General Manager

A.Rajarajan Vs The Registrar

M.Monica, Vs The Registrar

R.Amulraj Vs Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (Tangedco)

Jothi Malleables (P) Ltd. Htsc No. 033 Vs The Chairman