Allowed

K.Vasantha Kumar v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC10 Aug 2021CRL OP(MD)/9503/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, K.Vasantha Kumar, who feared arrest in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 307, and 506(2) of the IPC. The petition was allowed subject to conditions including reporting daily and not tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail upon arrest, conditionally with a bond and two sureties of Rs.10,000 each.

K.Vasantha Kumar Vs The Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

CRL OP(MD)No.9503 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 10.08.2021

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI

¶7

CRL OP(MD)No.9503 of 2021

¶8

K.Vasantha Kumar ... Petitioner/Accused No.2

¶9

Vs The State rep.by The Inspector of Police, Somarasampettai Police Station, Somarasampettai, Trichy District. (In Crime No.655 of 2021) ... Respondent/Complainant

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.R.SUNDAR, Advocate

¶11

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 :-

¶15

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime no.655 of 2021 on the file of the respondent Police.

¶16

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶17

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 307 and 506(2) of IPC in Crime No.655 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶18

The case of the prosecution is that on 11.07.2021, a dispute arose while the parties were travelling on the road. Due to which, the petitioner's father had attacked the defacto complainant's uncle with knife and the petitioner had abused the defacto complainant using filthy language. Hence, the complaint.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he is falsely implicated in this case.

¶20

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

¶21

1/3

¶22

CRL OP(MD)No.9503 of 2021

¶23

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), opposed this petition on the ground that investigation is yet to be completed.

¶24

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation levelled against this petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and hence, this petition is allowed.

¶25

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Judicial Magistrate No.5, Trichy on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:

¶26

[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.

¶27

[b]the petitioner shall report before respondent police daily at 10.30 am., until further orders.

¶28

[c]the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶29

[d]the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶30

[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].

¶31

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

sd/-

10/08/2021

/ TRUE COPY /

/ /2021

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

¶37

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Madurai - 625 023.

¶38

2/3

¶39

CRL OP(MD)No.9503 of 2021

¶40

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.

¶41

¶42

1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.5 TRICHY.

¶43

2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY.

¶44

3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SOMARASAMPETTAI POLICE STATION, SOMARASAMPETTAI, TRICHY DISTRICT.

¶45

4.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶46

MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶47

ORDER

¶48

¶49

SA/JC/SAR.1/17.08.2021/3P/5C

¶50

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

¶51

3/3

K.Vasantha Kumar v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Vasantha 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

Soundarapandian Vs The Inspector of Police

D.Maheshwaran Vs The Inspector of Police

Ananthraj @ Anandaraj Vs The Inspector of Police

Ratheesh Kumar Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

K.Selvakumar Vs The Inspector of Police

Murugesan Vs The Inspector of Police