Allowed

Jahanraj v. Inspector of Police

Madras HC20 Dec 2021CRL OP/24991/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal original petition filed under Section 438 CrPC, the petitioner sought anticipatory bail apprehending arrest for offences under IPC and the IT Act. The High Court granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions including surrender within 15 days and weekly reporting to police.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail in event of arrest with bond of Rs.10,000, two sureties, surrender within 15 days, and weekly reporting to police.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 20.12.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.24991 of 2021

¶6

Jahanraj ...Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Inspector of Police ...Respondent Valangaiman Police Station, Tiruvarur District. (Crime No.422 of 2021)

¶9

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.422 of 2021 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Palanivel

¶11

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

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 147, 447, 505(1)(b) IPC and Section 77 of Information Technology Act, 2000 in Crime No.422 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶14

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused persons in violation of curfew order and celebrated birthday party near the Regional Development Officer and published the same in Facebook. Hence, the complaint.

¶15

3.The learned counsel appearing 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. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶16

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

¶17

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. He further submitted that the investigation is almost completed. However, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner and also the fact that the investigation is almost completed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶19

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on 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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Valangaiman, 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) if the petitioner fail to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

¶21

(b) 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;

¶22

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

(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 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

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

¶27

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

¶28

-sd/-

¶29

20/12/2021

¶30

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

¶31

TRUE COPY

¶32

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

¶33

1 THE DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VALANGAIMAN, THIRUVARUR.

¶34

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THIRUVARUR. [FOR INFORMATION]

¶35

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶36

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VALANGAIMAN POLICE STATION, TIRUVARUR DISTRICT.

¶37

+1 CC to M/S. N.PALANIVEL Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.15176

CRL OP.24991/2021

Date :20/12/2021

TA-28/12/2021

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

Jahanraj v. Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jahanraj 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

Ramu Vs State Rep by

Elavarasan Vs the State Rep by

Gunasekar Vs State by

Senu @ Senuvasan Vs the State Rep by

Sivakumar Vs the State Rep by

K.Vasudevan Vs State by