Allowed

Senthilmurugan v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC22 Jul 2021CRL OP(MD)/9715/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, an accused in a case for illegally transporting river sand, subject to specific conditions including reporting daily, depositing a sum, and obtaining a bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest within 15 days, subject to a bond of Rs.10,000, a deposit of Rs.5,000 to CMPRF, and daily reporting.

Senthilmurugan Vs The Inspector of Police — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

CRL OP(MD)No.9715 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 22/07/2021

¶5

Senthilmurugan ... Petitioner/Accused

¶6

¶7

The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Vangal Police Station, Karur District. (In Crime No.397 of 2021) ... Respondent/Complainant

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.V.NAGARAJAN,

¶9

Advocate.

¶10

For Respondent : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate(Crl.side)

¶11

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

¶12

PRAYER :-

¶13

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.397 of 2021 on the file of the respondent Police.

¶14

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶15

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Section 379 IPC r/w Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals(Development & Regulations)Act, 1957 in Crime No.397 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶16

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner said to have illegally transported 100 kgs of river sand without any valid permission. Therefore, the present case came to be registered.

¶17

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

¶18

1/3

¶19

CRL OP(MD)No.9715 of 2021

¶20

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution.

¶21

4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner has no previous case pending against him.

¶22

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with a condition that the petitioner shall not indulge in similar offence in future. If the petitioner is repeated the same offence, the anticipatory bail granted now, will be cancelled automatically.

¶23

6.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 learned Judicial MagistrateNo.II, Karur 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 the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

¶24

[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.

¶25

[b] the petitioner shall make a non-refundable deposit for a sum of Rs .5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the credit of Government of Tamil Nadu, CMPRF in IOB, Secretariat Branch, Chennai9 (Account No.11720 10000 00070, IFSC Code: IOBA0001172), within a period of two weeks without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court and produce the receipt/acknowledgment before the learned Judicial MagistrateNo.II, Karur.

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

[f] 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 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶30

2/3

¶31

CRL OP(MD)No.9715 of 2021

¶32

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].

¶33

[ g ]If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC. sd/22/07/2021 / TRUE COPY / / /2021 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶34

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.

¶35

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, KARUR. 2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KARUR DISTRICT. 3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VANGAL POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT. 4.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. Copy to: THE OFFICER INCHARGE, CHIEF MINISTERS PUBLIC RELIEF FUND, GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU SECRETARIAT, CHENNAI 09.

¶36

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.9715 of 2021 Date :22/07/2021 (2/2) GNS SS/JC/SAR-IV/26.07.2021 : 3P/6C

¶37

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

¶38

3/3

Senthilmurugan v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Senthilmurugan 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

Selvam Vs The Forest Range Officer

Gnanamuthu Joseph.S Vs The Inspector of Police

Yovan Rajadurai Vs The Inspector of Police

R. Soundrapandiyan, Vs State Rep. by the Principal

C.Arun @ Arunachalam Vs the Chairman

Harishkumar Vs The Inspector of Police