Allowed

Murugan @ Saravanan Perumal v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC2 Sept 2021CRL OP(MD)/12495/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench allowed a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C., releasing the petitioner on bond with conditions not to tamper with evidence, abscond, or fail to report for interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail in event of arrest on bond of Rs. 10,000 with conditions not to tamper with evidence, abscond, or fail to report.

Murugan @ Saravanan Perumal Vs The Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 02/09/2021 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI CRL OP(MD). No.12495 of 2021

¶2

Murugan @ Saravanan Perumal, ... Petitioner/Sole Accused

¶3

State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Moondradaippu Police Station. Tirunelveli District. (cr.No. 133 of 2021). ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.Venkatesh D, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaisamy Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶4

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C

¶5

PRAYER :-

¶6

For Anticipatory bail in Crime No.133 of 2021 on the file of the Respondent police.

¶7

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶8

The petitioner/Sole Accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 353 and 379 IPC in Crime No.133 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶9

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has illegally transported one unit of stone by using Mini Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-72-CZ-2549. Therefore, the present case came to be registered.

¶10

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case.

¶11

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner has transported one unit of stone illegally in Mini Lorry. He further submitted that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner herein.

¶12

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the petitioner has not involved in any other offences, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶13

6.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, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri, on condition that 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:

¶14

[a] 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 Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity.

¶15

[b] the petitioner shall report before respondent police as and when required for interrogation.

¶16

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶17

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶18

[e] 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].

¶19

[ f ]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

sd/-

02/09/2021

/ TRUE COPY /

/ /2021

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.I) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶25

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶26

¶27

The Judicial Magistrate

¶28

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

¶29

The Chief Judicial Magistrate Tirunelveli District.

¶30

The Inspector of Police Moondradaippu Police Station. Tirunelveli District.

¶31

The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶32

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12495 of 2021 Date :02/09/2021 RD/SKN/SAR-I(9.09.2021) 3P 5C

¶33

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

Murugan @ Saravanan Perumal v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murugan @ Saravanan Perumal 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

Perumal Vs The Inspector of Police

Merankhani Vs The Forest Ranger

Menaka Vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police

Ashok Vs The Inspector of Police

B.Arichandran Vs The Inspector of Police

K.Selvi @ Ranjanadevi Vs The Inspector of Police