Allowed

Kamalesh v. State Rep by

Madras HC26 Aug 2022CRL OP/20303/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras granted bail to the petitioner arrested for robbery and assault under various IPC sections. Despite opposition by the public prosecutor citing the petitioner's habitual offender status, the court ordered release on bond with strict reporting conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to reporting twice daily and other strict conditions.

Kamalesh Vs State Rep by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Crl.OP.No.20303 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 26.08.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

Crl.OP.No.20303 of 2022

¶7

Kamalesh ...Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

State represented by The Inspector of Police, R-5, Virugambakkam Police Station, Chennai. (Crime No.506 of 2022)

¶10

..Respondent

¶11

PRAYER:

¶12

Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No. 506 of 2022 on the file of the respondent.

¶13

For Petitioner :Mr. S.Senthil Kumar

¶14

For Respondent :Mr.A.Damodaran, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/6

¶16

Crl.OP.No.20303 of 2022

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial

¶19

custody on 25.07.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 336, 427, 392, 397 & 506(ii) of IPC in crime No.506 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

¶20

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with

¶21

other accused waylaid the defacto complainant and robbed a sum of Rs.300/- and a cell phone and also attacked him with knife. Hence, the case.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

¶23

petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶24

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that, the

¶25

petitioner is an habitual offender, apart from this case, there are six previous case pending against the petitioner. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶26

2/6

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/6

¶28

Crl.OP.No.20303 of 2022

¶29

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case

¶30

and also the period of incarceration by the petitioner from the date of their arrest i.e., 25.07.2022, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶31

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail

¶32

on his executing 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

¶33

XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai and on further conditions that:

¶34

[a] 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.

¶35

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police twice daily at 10.30 a.m. and 5.30 p.m., for a period of six weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/6

¶37

3/6

¶38

Crl.OP.No.20303 of 2022

¶39

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation

¶40

or trial.

¶41

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

¶42

[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].

¶43

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

¶44

26.08.2022

¶45

Sma

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/6

¶47

4/6

¶48

Crl.OP.No.20303 of 2022

¶49

¶50

XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.

¶51

2.The Inspector of Police, R-5, Virugambakkam Police Station, Chennai.

¶52

Central Prison-2, Puzhal, Chennai.

¶53

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras

¶54

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6

¶55

Crl.OP.No.20303 of 2022

¶56

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

¶57

Sma

¶58

Crl.O.P.No.20303 of 2022

¶59

26.08.2022

¶60

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/6

Kamalesh v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamalesh v. State Rep by

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

V.Sekar Vs State Rep by

M.Arun Prakash Vs Inspector of Police

G.S.Karthikeyan Vs the Superintendent of Police (West)

Ajithkumar Vs State Rep by

Gopal Narayanan Vs Elangaovan

R.Manikandan Vs the State Rep. by