Allowed

Samayamuthu v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC4 Jun 2021CRL OP(MD)/7232/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners facing charges of illegal river sand transport under IPC Section 379 and the Mines and Minerals Act. Due to the pandemic, arrest was deemed unnecessary, and bail was granted with strict conditions including reporting to police and depositing money.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners ordered released on personal bond with sureties; directed to deposit amount to Advocate Clerk Welfare Association; specific police reporting conditions imposed.

Samayamuthu Vs The Inspector of Police — Environment and Pollution | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.7232 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 04/06/2021

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.7232 of 2021

¶8

1.Samayamuthu

¶9

2.Kalidoss

¶10

3.Krishnan ... Petitioners/Accused

¶11

No.1 to 3

¶12

¶13

The State rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Uchipuli Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

¶14

Crime No.242 of 2021 ... Respondent/Complainant

¶15

For Petitioners : Mr.A.Ananda Raj, Advocate.

¶16

For Respondent : Mr.S.Ravi,

¶17

Additional Public Prosecutor

¶18

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

¶19

PRAYER :-

¶20

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.242 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police.

¶21

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶22

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 379 of IPC and 21(4) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation), Act, 1957, in Crime No.242 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶23

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners have illegally transported the river sand by using his tractor. Hence, the complaint.

¶24

3 .The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent person and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and the petitioners have been https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶25

1/3

¶26

CRL OP(MD). No.7232 of 2021

¶27

falsely implicated in the present case and hence, he seeks anticipatory bail.

¶28

4 .The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that the petitioners have illegally transported 1/2 unit of river sand without any valid permission. He further submitted that there are one previous case is pending against A1 and A3 and there is no previous cases pending against the A2.

¶29

5 .Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent police.

¶30

6 .Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the impact of Covid-19 pandemic situation and the consequent efforts not to congest the prisons, this Court is of the view that the arrest of the petitioners at this point of time is not necessary and not warranted in the interest of public at large, hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners on certain conditions.

¶31

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police on executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees Ten Thousand only] with two sureties each for a likesum to the satisfaction of the respondent police and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Ramanathapuram, and execute a fresh personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees Ten Thousand only] with two sureties each for a likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Judicial Magistrate, within a period of one month, from the date of resumption of regular work in subordinate Courts in view of the present pandemic situation and on further conditions that:

¶32

[a] 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;

¶33

[b] the petitioners are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.7,500/- (Rupees Seven Thousand Five hundred only)jointly, to the credit of Advocate Clerk's Welfare Association, Madurai-625 023 (Indian Bank Savings Account No.496039124, IFSC Code: IDIB000H040), within a period of two weeks without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court;

¶34

[c]the 1^st and 3rd petitioners shall report before the respondent police on every Monday at 11.30 a.m., for a period of eight weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; the second 2^nd petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Monday at 11.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

¶35

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

¶36

2/3

¶37

CRL OP(MD). No.7232 of 2021

¶38

[d]the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶39

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

¶40

[f]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

¶41

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

sd/-

04/06/2021

/ TRUE COPY /

/ /2021

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

¶47

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. TO

¶48

1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE No.2, RAMANATHAPURAM.

¶49

2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT. 3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, UCHIPULI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶50

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

¶51

COPY TO:

¶52

THE OFFICER INCHARGE ADVOCATE CLERK’S WELFARE ASSOCIATION, MADURAI-625 023

¶53

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.7232 of 2021 Date :04/06/2021 TTA TK/AKM/SAR.1/09.06.2021/3P/6C

¶54

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

¶55

3/3

Samayamuthu v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samayamuthu 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

L.Kaandeeban Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

Yashar Arapath Vs The Inspector of Police

Giri Ram.J Vs The Superintendent of GST and Central Excise

Govindasamy(mani) @ Govindasamy Vs The Inspector of Police

Palanisamy Vs The Inspector of Police

Vimal Vs The Inspector of Police