Allowed

Muneeswaran v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC8 Jun 2021CRL OP(MD)/7331/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner apprehending arrest in a criminal case involving offences under the IPC and the Tamil Nadu Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Act, considering pandemic restrictions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail was ordered on execution of personal bonds for Rs. 5,000/- with two sureties each for a like sum, subject to specific conditions regarding appearance and conduct.

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

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.7331 of 2021

¶2

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

¶3

Date : 08/06/2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

CRL OP(MD). No.7331 of 2021

¶7

Muneeswaran ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs

¶8

State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Kovilangulam Police Station, Ramnad District. Crime No.62 of 2021 ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.J.Chakkaravarthy, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar, Government Counsel (Crl.Side)

¶9

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

¶10

PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in crime No.62/2021 on the file of the respondent police.

¶11

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶12

The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 269, 270, 271, 279 of IPC r/w Section 179 of M.V.Act and Section 21(1) of Tamilnadu Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Act, 1957, in Crime No.62 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, and seeks anticipatory bail.

¶13

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Counsel(Crl.side) for the respondent police.

¶14

3. Though the learned Government Counsel(Crl.side) for the respondent would strongly oppose by pointing out the bad antecedents of the petitioner, it is seen that the previous case arising under Mines and Minerals Act is of the year 2016.

¶15

4 . Considering the current pandemic situation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on certain conditions.

¶16

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

¶17

1/3

¶18

CRL OP(MD). No.7331 of 2021

¶19

5 . Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police on executing personal bonds for a sum of Rs.5,000/- [Rupees Five Thousand only] with two sureties each for a likesum to the satisfaction of the respondent police and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kamuthi, Ramnad District and execute fresh personal bonds for a sum of Rs.5,000/[Rupees Five 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:

¶20

[a]the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bonds and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar cards or Bank pass Books to ensure their identity;

¶21

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

¶22

[c]the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶23

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

¶24

[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]; and

¶25

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

sd/-

08/06/2021

/ TRUE COPY /

/ /2021

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

¶31

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.

¶32

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

¶33

2/3

¶34

CRL OP(MD). No.7331 of 2021

¶35

¶36

THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KAMUTHI, RAMNAD DISTRICT.

¶37

DO-THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RAMNAD DISTRICT.

¶38

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOVILANGULAM POLICE STATION, RAMNAD DISTRICT.

¶39

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

¶40

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.7331 of 2021 Date :08/06/2021 RMI

¶41

MS/MNR/SAR-3/11.06.2021/3P.5C

¶42

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

¶43

3/3

Muneeswaran v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muneeswaran 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

Vimal Vs The Inspector of Police

P.Mahendran @ Mahendra Kumar Vs The Inspector of Police

Govindasamy(mani) @ Govindasamy Vs The Inspector of Police

Marimuthu Vs The Inspector of Police

Vijayaragavan Vs The Inspector of Police

Soodamani Vs The Inspector of Police