Dismissed

Arockiadass v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC15 Mar 2022CRL MP/2026/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petition seeking modification of a bail condition was dismissed as infructuous. The Court had already vacated the anticipatory bail due to the petitioner's repeated failure to comply with the monetary deposit condition by the extended deadline.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed as infructuous; directions issued to the police to secure the petitioner for judicial remand.

Arockiadass Vs the Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Tuesday, the Fifteenth day of March Two Thousand Twenty Two

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mrs Justice S. KANNAMMAL

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.2026 of 2022

¶7

IN CRL OP.8854 of 2021

¶8

AROCKIADOSS [ PETITIONER / 5^th ACCUSED ]

¶9

¶10

STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAMPULIYUR POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.162 OF 2021)

¶11

[ RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT ]

¶12

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to condition imposed in para 6 in order dated 12.05.2021 passed in Crl.O.P.NO.8854/2021 that he has to pay sum of Rs.25,000/- either through RTGS/NEFT/Cash/Demand Draft in favour of The Deen Rajiv Gadhi Government Hospital Chennai for purpose treating Covid 19 patients.

¶13

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S K.VIJAYAKUMAR, Advocate for the Petitioner and of MR.S.BALAJI, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶14

This Petition is filed to modify the condition imposed in para (6) in the order dated 12.05.2021 of this Court in Crl.O.P.No.8854 of 2021, as the petitioner is an agricultural cooly and he is not able to deposit the amount.

¶15

It is the case of the Respondent police that the petitioner and other accused were involved in the process of illegal manufacturing of TASMAC liquor bottles and labels and trying to sold in the black market and hence case was registered against them.

¶16

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

¶17

When the petitioner moved for anticipatory bail, this Court granted the same with a condition that the petitioner has to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) in favour of “The Dean, Rajiv Gandhi Government Hospital, Chennai” within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. But the Petitioner has not complied with the conditions imposed. As the two w\eeks time was over, he filed a petition for extension of time and this Court also extended further two weeks' time and imposed condition that if the petitioner failed to comply with the condition within the time extended, the order already granted for anticipatory bail shall stand automatically dismissed.

¶18

Without complying the above conditions, now, the petitioner has filed this petition for modifying the condition, stating that he is not able to mobilize Rs.25,000/- to pay in favour of the Dean, Rajiv Gandhi Government Hospital, Chennai.

¶19

This Court has ordered Aniticipartory Bail on 12.05.2021 with a condition that the petitioner should pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- to the Dean, Rajiv Gandhi Government Hospital, Chennai, within a period of two weeks. As the Petitioner has not complied with the above order, as per the request of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, further two weeks' time was extended by this Court on 20.01.2022. Since the Petitioner has not complied with the order for the second time also, as per the order of this court dated 20.01.2022, the anticipatory bail granted was automatically vacated and in view of the same, this petition has become infructuous.

¶20

In such a view of the matter, the anticipatory bail granted by this Court is vacated and the petition filed to modify the condition is dismissed as infructious. The Respondent police is directed the take necessary action to secure the petitioner/accused for judicial remand.

¶21

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶22

TRUE COPY

¶23

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶24

¶25

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.II, PANRUTI.

¶26

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

¶27

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE CUDDALORE [FOR INFORMATION]

¶28

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAMPULIYUR POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT.

¶29

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶30

5 THE DEAN, RAJIV GANDHI GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL, CHENNAI.

¶31

C.C. to M/S K.VIJAYAKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶32

Order in CRL MP.2026/2022 in CRL OP.8854/2021 Date :15/03/2022

¶33

From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format

¶34

JPA 24/03/2022

¶35

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

Arockiadass v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arockiadass 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Th Oriental Insurance Company Vs M/S Indian Bank

Kamalam Vs S. Palanisamy

Malliga Vs M/S Ppg Enterprices Firm

V.Subramani Vs M/S.E.L.E. Farms Private Ltd.

Jewin Selvaraj(Senior Citizen) Vs John Antony Jesuraj

Mr. P.N.Rayappan Vs Mrs. Marammal