Allowed

Sagayaraj v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC25 Mar 2021CRL OP(MD)/4090/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused of illegally transporting gravel sand under Section 379 IPC r/w Mines Act. The petitioner was ordered to deposit Rs.40,000 in a hospital account and execute a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, reporting daily to police for two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Order to pay Rs.40,000 to Government Rajaji Hospital, execute a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, and comply with daily reporting conditions.

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

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.4090 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Date : 25/03/2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

CRL OP(MD). No.4090 of 2021

¶7

Sagayaraj ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Alanganallur Police Station, Madurai District. Crime No.93/2021 ... Respondent/Complainant

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Susi Kumar, Advocate.

¶9

For Respondent : Mr.M.Chandra Sekaran, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶10

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

¶11

PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime no. 93 of 2021 on the file of the respondent Police.

¶12

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶13

The petitioner, who is arrayed as A2, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 379 of I.P.C., r/w Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Act, 1957, in Crime No.93 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶14

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused persons were said to have illegally transported six units of gravel sand. Hence, a complaint has been registered.

¶15

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

¶16

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the

¶17

1/3

¶18

CRL OP(MD). No.4090 of 2021

¶19

prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is not having any bad antecedent. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶20

5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police submitted that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner.

¶21

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶22

7.Accordingly, the petitioner shall draw a demand draft in favour of Dean, Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai, for a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court. The petitioner shall produce the proof of remittance /submission of Demand Draft to Dean while executing sureties. On acknowledgment of the same by the Dean, Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or his appearance, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti, 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 respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

¶23

(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 Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

¶24

(b)the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

¶25

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

¶26

(d)the petitioner 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 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 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and;

¶28

2/3

¶29

CRL OP(MD). No.4090 of 2021

¶30

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

¶31

/ TRUE COPY /

¶32

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶33

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.

¶34

TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VADIPATTI. 2. DO-THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI DISTRICT. 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALANGANALLUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT. 4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶35

COPY TO:

¶36

THE DEAN, GOVERNMENT RAJAJI HOSPITAL, MADURAI. +1 CC to M/s.C.SUSIKUMAR, Advocate ( SR-2578[I] dated 26/03/2021 ) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.4090 of 2021 Date :25/03/2021 VSG MS/VR/30.03.2021/3P.7C

¶37

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

¶38

3/3

Sagayaraj v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sagayaraj 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

Stalin Vs The Inspector of Police

Balu @ Balamurugan Vs The Inspector of Police

Saravanankumar @ Saravanan Vs The Inspector of Police

Murugan Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

Ranjithkumar Vs The Inspector of Police

Pitchai Muthu Vs The Inspector of Police