Allowed

Irudayanathan v. State Rep by

Madras HC7 Jun 2021CRL OP/7905/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Madras granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who faced arrest for allegations under IPC Sections 354-A, 324, and 506(ii). The court imposed strict conditions, including daily police reporting and execution of a bond, noting the investigation was nearly complete.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions including daily police reporting, execution of a bond with two sureties, and prohibitions on tampering with evidence or absconding.

Irudayanathan Vs State Rep by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 07.06.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.7905 of 2021

Irudayanathan

.. Petitioner

Vs.

State represented by Inspector of Police, Choolaimedu Police Station, Chennai. (Crime No.23 of 2021) .. Respondent

¶10

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.23 of 2021 pending investigation on the file of the Respondent.

¶11

(The case has been heard through video conference)

¶12

This is the third anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police in connection with a case registered in Crime No.23 of 2021, for the alleged offence under Sections 354-A, 324, 506(ii) of IPC r/w Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act, 2002.

¶13

The allegation against the petitioner is that he had trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant, who is a widow, when she was alone at her house, tried to molest her and when she resisted, the petitioner is said to have bite her cheek.

¶14

Earlier, this Court dismissed the anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner on 12.03.2021, considering the gravity of the offence and the seriousness of the allegations made against the petitioner.

¶15

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the investigation is almost over and that this is the third anticipatory bail application.

¶16

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

¶17

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) strongly opposed the granting of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He submitted that the earlier anticipatory bail application moved by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 12.03.2021, in Crl.O.P.No.4483 of 2021.

¶18

Hear both sides.

¶19

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the investigation is almost over, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

¶20

(a) 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 learned XVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties, 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

(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.

¶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 petitioners 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].

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

-sd/-
07/06/2021
This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried
into execution by all concerned
TRUE COPY
Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.)
High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 XVII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
SAIDAPET, CHENNAI
2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI(FOR INFORMATION)
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
CHOOLAIMEDU POLICE STATION,
CHENNAI.
4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S.R.PARTHIBAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges
CRL OP.7905/2021
Date :07/06/2021
RVR 06/07/2021

¶30

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

Irudayanathan v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irudayanathan 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

R.Ramesh Vs The Special District Revenue officer(La)

S.Ganesh Vs The Project Director

R.Nagaraj Vs The Sub Registrar

Nandhakumar Vs State

S.Arumugam Vs State Rep by

Rangarajan Vs the State by