Allowed

K.Thirumal v. State, Represented by

Madras HC1 Jun 2021CRL OP/9316/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Madras issued an order granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner, K. Thirumal, apprehending arrest for alleged offences involving possession of sand under IPC and the Mines Act.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail for 15 days to execute a bond with sureties, released from arrest on appearance within 15 days or upon bond submission.

K.Thirumal Vs State, Represented by — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 01.06.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTIC E R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.9316 of 2021

K.Thirumal

... Petitioner

Vs.

State, represented by The Inspector of Police, Kadampuliyur Police Station, Cuddalore District.

¶10

(Crime No.175 of 2021) ... Respondent

¶11

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.175 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Vijaya Basker

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.L.Baskaran

¶14

Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side) O R D E R

¶15

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 379 and 430 IPC and Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, in Crime No.175 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶16

The case against the petitioner is that he was found in possession of ¼ unit of odai sand in a bullock cart. The bullock cart and the bulls have been seized.

¶17

Considering the nature of the offence and the quantum of sand involved, I am of the opinion that the petitioner could be granted anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Panruti, Cuddalore District within 15 days from the date of resumption of regular hearings in the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions:

¶18

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

¶19

[a] The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.5,000/(Rupees Five 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, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed;

¶20

[b] the petitioner and 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;

¶21

[c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation;

¶22

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶23

[e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶24

[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];

¶25

[g] if the accused persons thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

¶26

Considering the present situation, the petitioner is granted 15 days time to execute the bond and furnish sureties from the date of commencement of regular functioning of the court below. In the event of violation of any of the conditions, the anticipatory bail granted will stand automatically cancelled.

¶27

-sd/-

¶28

01/06/2021

¶29

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

¶30

TRUE COPY

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

TO
1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
NO.II, PANRUTI, CUDDALORE DISTRICT
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
CUDDALORE DISTRICT.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KADAMPULIYUR POLICE STATION,
CUDDALORE DISTRICT.
4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S.LAW VISION Advocate on payment of necessary charges
CRL OP.9316/2021
Date :01/06/2021
RVR 06/07/2021

¶34

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

K.Thirumal v. State, Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Thirumal v. State, Represented 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

S.Rajavelu Vs P.Thilagavathy

Mrs.Usha Vinod Kumar Vs Mr.Dinesh J.Naidu

M/s.Hyundai Motor India Ltd. Vs M/S.A-1 Auto Pvt. Ltd.

Dabhi Velji Bhai Vs State Rep by

Manikandan Vs State Rep. by

V.Venkatesan Vs State, Represented by