Allowed

Modhilal v. the State Rep.by

Madras HC12 Apr 2022CRL MP/4905/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition, the High Court of Madras relaxed a condition requiring petitioners to report daily to the police station, noting their regular compliance, and ordered them to appear only as required for interrogation.

What did the court decide?

The condition to report daily before the respondent police is relaxed; petitioners shall appear as and when required for interrogation.

Modhilal Vs the State Rep.by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Tuesday, the Twelfth day of April Two Thousand Twenty Two

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Dr Justice G. JAYACHANDRAN

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.4905 of 2022

¶7

IN CRL OP.13362/2021

¶8

1 MODHILAL [ PETITIONERS ] 2 CHETARAM MALI.

¶9

¶10

THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUMATHAMPATTI POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE DISTRICT. CRIME NO.407 OF 2021.

¶11

[ RESPONDENT ]

¶12

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to relax the condition (c) the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders imposed on the petitioners by an order dated 02.08.2021 made in Crl.O.P.No. 13362 of 2021 and thus render justice.

¶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. C.RAMKUMAR, Advocate for the petitioner and of M/S.S.SANTHOSH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶14

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent.

¶15

2.According to the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), the petitioners are complying with the condition imposed by this Court regularly.

¶16

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

¶17

3.Considering the fact that the petitioners are regularly complying with the conditional order dated 02.08.2021 made in Crl.O.P.No.13362 of 2021, the condition imposed on the petitioners in para 6(c) that the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders, stands relaxed and the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. Accordingly, this petition is ordered.

¶18

-sd/-

¶19

12/04/2022

¶20

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

¶21

TRUE COPY

¶22

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

¶23

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SULUR.

¶24

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COIMBATORE. [FOR INFORMATION]

¶25

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUMATHAMPATTI POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE DISTRICT.

¶26

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶27

5 THE CHIEF EDUCATION OFFICER, COIMBATORE DISTRICT.

¶28

+1 C.C. to M/S. C.RAMKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO. 5735 Order in CRL MP.4905/2022 in CRL OP.13362/2021 Date :12/04/2022

¶29

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

¶30

RW 20/04/2022

¶31

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

Modhilal v. the State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Modhilal v. the State Rep.by

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

B.R.Muralidhar Vs S.Mathivanan

P.Anbalagan Vs State of Tamilnadu

Govindharaj Vs the Inspector of Police

Pradeep Vs the State Rep by

Jayanthi Vs State Rep.by

Suthir Kumar Vs the State, Represented by