Allowed

Allwin v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC20 Dec 2021CRL OP(MD)/20330/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court granted bail to the petitioner, an accused in a robbery case, considering co-accused bail, completed investigation, and lack of prior record, subject to reporting and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by executing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties for a like sum, conditioned to report daily at 10.30 a.m.

Allwin Vs The Inspector of Police — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.20330 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 20/12/2021

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.20330 of 2021

¶8

Allwin ... Petitioner/Accused Rank Not Known

¶9

¶10

State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Perumalpuram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

¶11

Cr.No.257/2021. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.C.Susi Kumar, Advocate.

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶13

PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C.

¶14

PRAYER :-

¶15

For Bail in Crime No.257 of 2021 on the file of the Respondent police.

¶16

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶17

The petitioner, who was arrested on 03.12.2021 for the offence under Sections 420, 397, 342 and 506(ii) I.P.C, in Crime.No.257 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶18

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is working as a Manager in Ruthra Enterprises Lubricant Oil Company. On 20.08.2021, the defacto complainant sent lubricant oil in a lorry. When the lorry reached the storage area, the accused persons came with deadly weapons, attacked the defacto complainant and others, committed robbery of lubricant oil, cash of Rs.30,000/- and also a cell phone. Hence, the complaint.

¶19

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that some of the co-accused were already granted bail by the trial Court and one of the accused Esakkimuthu also granted bail by this Court https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ on 27.09.2021. This petitioner is in custody for more than 17 days

¶20

1/3

¶21

CRL OP(MD). No.20330 of 2021

¶22

in custody and confession statement also recorded from this petitioner. Hence, he seeks bail.

¶23

4.The learned Additional Public Prosector appearing for the respondent police would submit that there was conspiracy between all the accused persons and since the time of occurrence was at night, the defacto complainant could not identify all the persons, hence based on the confession this case was registered against other accused persons and that the petitioner is not having any previous case at his credit.

¶24

5.Reading of CD file shows that based upon the confession statement of the co-accused, this petitioner has been implicated in this matter. Reading of confession statement shows that this petitioner was engaged with the other persons for the purpose of committing robbery, on payment of Rs.10,000/- each. In this case, the confession statement of the petitioner was also recorded. From his confession it is seen that one pulsar vehicle has been recovered from the petitioner.

¶25

6.Considering the facts that one of the accused Esakkimuthu also granted bail by this Court on 27.09.2021, that the major portion of the investigation has been completed and the properties were also recovered, that the petitioner is not having any previous case, and also the period of incarceration, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶26

7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, on executing a personal 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 Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruneleveli, and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

sd/-

20/12/2021

/ TRUE COPY /

21/12/2021

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, 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.20330 of 2021

¶35

¶36

1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tirunelveli.

¶37

2.Do Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli.

¶38

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Palayamkottai.

¶39

4.The Inspector of Police, Perumalpuram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

¶40

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

¶41

ORDER

¶42

IN CRL OP(MD) No.20330 of 2021 Date :20/12/2021 RS/VR/SAR2(21.12.2021) 3P-6C

¶43

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

¶44

3/3

Allwin v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Allwin 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharmenthira, Vs the Inspector of Police

S. Rashiya, Vs the Inspector General of

[email protected] Vs the Inspector of Police

Solaimalai Vs The Inspector of Police

Arputharaj Vs The Inspector of Police

Nirmal Vs The Sub Inspector of Police