Allowed

S.Sasikumar v. the State Rep by Its

Madras HC22 Feb 2021CRL OP/3071/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the petitioner, the first accused, accused of assault causing grievous injuries and attempt to murder. The court considered the victim's discharge and the near-completion of investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on execution of bond for Rs. 10,000 by two sureties subject to daily police reporting and other standard conditions.

S.Sasikumar Vs the State Rep by Its — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 22.02.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.3071 of 2021

¶6

S.Sasikumar ... Petitioner Vs. The State Rep. by ... Respondent The Inspector of Police, G-7 Chetpet Police Station, Chennai., Crime No.10 of 2021

¶7

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime No.10 of 2021 pending investigation on the file of the Respondent. For Petitioner : Mr. M. Naresh For Respondent : Mrs.M. Prabhavathi, APP ORDER (The case has been heard through video conference) The Petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.01.2021 for the offence punishable under Sections 294 (b), 341, 307, 506(ii) and 120(b) of IPC in Crime No.10 of 2021, seeks bail.

¶8

Totally, there are 3 accused and the petitioner is A1. The case of the prosecution is that a quarrel arose between the defacto complainant's husband and A3 in a funeral rituals of one Boopalan. Due to which, on the date of occurrence, all the accused persons said to have waylaid the husband of the defacto complainant and attacked him with knife and caused grievous injuries to him. Hence, a complaint came to be registered.

¶9

The counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that now injured has been discharged from the hospital. Hence, he prays for grant of bail.

¶10

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

¶11

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that due to previous enmity, the petitioner along with other accused persons brutally attacked the victim and caused serious injuries to him. Now, injured has been discharged from the hospital and investigation is almost completed. However, she opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶12

Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstance of the case, and the fact that injured has been discharged from the hospital and investigation is almost completed and also considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

¶13

(a) Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to 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 learned II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, and on further conditions that:

¶14

(b) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity;

¶15

¶16

(d) the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar

¶17

nature;

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

(g) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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];

¶21

(h) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.

¶23

-sd/-

¶24

22/02/2021

¶25

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

¶26

TRUE COPY

¶27

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104. TO 1 THE II METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT, EGMORE, CHENNAI. 2 THE CHEIF METRTOPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE[FOR INFORMATION]. 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS. 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, G-7 CHETPET POLICE STATION, CHENNAI. 5 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON,PUZHAL. CC to M/S.M.NARESH Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶28

CRL OP.3071/2021 Date :22/02/2021 MN-23/02/2021

¶29

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

S.Sasikumar v. the State Rep by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Sasikumar v. the State Rep by Its

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

Solomon Vs v.Devaraj

Palanisamy Vs State Rep.by

Prabu Vs State Rep.by

Imran Vs State Rep.by

G.Subramani Vs Deputy Superintendent of Police (Dsp)

Madeswaran Vs the Inspector of Police