Allowed

Vimalraj v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC3 Jun 2021CRL OP/9781/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal Original Petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, apprehending arrest for allegations of illegal sand possession. The order imposed conditions including payment of funds for COVID-19 relief and execution of a bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Original Petition allowed; petitioner released on bail in case of arrest subject to conditions regarding COVID-19 fund payment and surety bond.

Vimalraj Vs the Inspector of Police — Corruption | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 03.06.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTIC E R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.9781 of 2021

¶6

Vimalraj ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State rep by The Inspector of Police, Nagapattinam Police Station, Nagapattinam District. (Crime No.245 of 2021)

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

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.245 of 2021 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Nagapattinam Police Station, Nagapattinam District.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Muruga Bharathi

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.L.Baskaran Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER

¶13

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Section 379 of IPC r/w Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, in Crime No.245 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶14

2.The case against the petitioner is that he was found in possession of one unit of Sowdu sand in a Tipper of its Tractor. The Tractor and its Tipper have been seized by the Police.

¶15

3.Mr.L.Baskaran, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that there is no previous case against the petitioner.

¶16

4.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 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Magistrate No.I, Nagapattinam, Nagapattinam District within 15 days

¶17

from the date of resumption of regular hearings in the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions:

¶18

[a] the petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) in favour of the Chief Medical Officer, District Head Quarters Hospital (GH), Nagapattinam for COVID-19 relief. The said amount shall be paid by way of Demand Draft (DD) or National Electronic Funds Transfer (NEFT) and the Court below is directed to entertain the bail bond only on production of proof for payment of the said sum;

¶19

[b] The petitioner shall also execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) along 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

[c] 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

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

[g] 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

[h] if the accused person thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

¶26

5.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 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ event of violation of any of the conditions, the anticipatory bail

¶27

granted will stand automatically cancelled.

¶28

-sd/-
03/06/2021
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.I, NAGAPATTINAM.
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
NAGAPATTINAM. [FOR INFORMATION]
3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
NAGAPATTINAM POLICE STATION,
NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT.
5 THE CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER,
DISTRICT HEAD QUARTERS HOSPITAL (GH),
NAGAPATTINAM.
CC to M/S.R.MURUGA BHARATHI Advocate on payment of necessary
charges
CRL OP.9781/2021
Date :03/06/2021
TA-13/07/2021

¶29

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

Vimalraj v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimalraj v. the 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

Nazeer Ahmed Vs State Rep. by

Hari Gopalakrishnan Nadar Vs State of Karnataka Rep.by

S.Ravichanadiran Vs State Rep. by Its

Kepl Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Vs Glory Industrial Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

M/S.Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd, Rep.by Its Senior Manager-Legal (South) Vs M/S.a.T.M.Constructions (P)Ltd., Represented by Its Director, Mr.Faiz Mohammed

A.Mohamed Irfan Vs the State of Tamil Nadu