Allowed

Stanly Kumar v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC9 Sept 2021CRL OP(MD)/13245/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted anticipatory bail to six petitioners accused in a case involving assault and theft arising from a civil dispute. The court imposed conditions including daily reporting, execution of a bond, and restrictions on tampering with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions including execution of bond, daily reporting, and restrictions on absconding or tampering with evidence.

Stanly Kumar Vs The Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.13245 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 09/09/2021 PRESENT

¶3

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI

¶4

CRL OP(MD). No.13245 of 2021

¶5

Stanly Kumar

¶6

Paul Thangam

¶7

Suresh Kumar

¶8

Vijayakumari

¶9

Selvakumari 6. Suganthi @ Jeyanthi ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 6

¶10

The State rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Thiruvattar Police Station, Kanyakumari District. Crime No.163 of 2021. ... Respondent/Complainant

¶11

For Petitioners : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy,

¶12

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶13

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

¶14

PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.163 of 2021 on the file of the Respondent Police.

¶15

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶16

The petitioners apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 147, 341, 323 and 379 I.P.C, in Crime No.163 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶17

2.The case of the prosecution is that due to civil dispute, the the petitioners assaulted the defacto complainant's mother and took away two sovereigns of gold jewel. Hence, the complaint.

¶18

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that there is a civil dispute between the petitioners and the defacto complainant. Hence a false case is foisted against the petitioners.

¶19

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, on instructions, would submit that the injured https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ has been discharged from the hospital.

¶20

1/3

¶21

CRL OP(MD). No.13245 of 2021

¶22

5.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital and it is a civil dispute, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Padmanabhapuram, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:

¶23

(a)the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity;

¶24

(b)the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶25

(c)the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶26

(d)the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶27

(e)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners 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]; and;

¶28

(f)if the accused/ petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

¶29

/ TRUE COPY / / /2021

¶30

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

¶31

Madurai - 625 023.

¶32

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

¶33

2/3

¶34

CRL OP(MD). No.13245 of 2021

¶35

¶36

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, PADMANABHAPURAM.

¶37

2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KANNIYAKUMARI DISTRICT AT NAGERCOIL.

¶38

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUVATTAR POLICE STATION, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

¶39

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶40

IAS

¶41

MK/JC/SAR.IV/16.09.2021/3P/5C

¶42

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

¶43

3/3

Stanly Kumar v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Stanly Kumar 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

P.Maruthu Pandi Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

K.Manikandan Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

Kala Vs The Inspector of Police

Nigilesan Vs The Inspector of Police

Sugumar Vs The Inspector of Police

Arunkumar Vs The Inspector of Police