Allowed

Manikandan v. State Rep. by

Madras HC1 Jun 2021CRL OP/9322/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, the 7th accused in a criminal case involving multiple offences including murder. The Court held that a co-accused confession lacked the weight of specific overt acts alleged in the FIR against the petitioner. Conditions for bail were framed, and 15 days was granted to execute the bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail with 15 days to execute bond with two sureties; bail granted contingent on arrest or appearance before Magistrate within the time limit.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 01.06.2021

¶3

CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTIC E R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶4

Crl.O.P.No.9322 of 2021

¶5

Manikandan ... Petitioner

¶6

Vs. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Maruvathur Police Station, Perambalur District. (Crime No.164 of 2021) ... Respondent

¶7

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.164 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Bennington

¶9

For Respondent : Mr.L.Baskaran Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side) O R D E R

¶10

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324, 355, 506 (ii), 302 IPC in Crime No.164 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. The petitioner is cited as 7^th accused in the said case.

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that no specific overt act has been alleged in the FIR as against the petitioner.

¶12

Mr.L.Baskaran, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that during investigation, the co-accused has confessed to the effect that the petitioner has beaten the deceased with a wooden log on his chest.

¶13

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

¶14

Being the co-accused's confession, I do not think that the same would have a weightage as the averments in the FIR. A reading of the FIR does not show any specific over act against the 7^th accused viz., the petitioner herein. Hence, 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-II, Perambalur within 15 days from the date of resumption of regular hearings in the said Court subject to the following conditions:

¶15

[a] 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, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed;

¶16

[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;

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

[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];

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

-sd/-
01/06/2021
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 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
NO.II, PERAMBALUR
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
PERAMBALUR(FOR INFORMATION)
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
MARUVATHUR POLICE STATION,
PERAMBALUR DISTRICT.
4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S.D.BENNINGTON Advocate on payment of necessary charges
CRL OP.9322/2021
Date :01/06/2021
RVR 06/07/2021

¶25

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

Manikandan v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manikandan 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

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

V.Venkatesan Vs State, Represented by

K.Thirumal Vs State, Represented by