Allowed

Valliammal v. State Rep by

Madras HC1 Feb 2022CRL OP/2228/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras granted anticipatory bail to petitioners facing charges of affray, public nuisance, voluntary causing of hurt, and intimidation. Bail was subject to reporting before police, executing a bond, and ensuring identity. The order directed execution by the Judicial Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties, subject to reporting and non-absconding conditions.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 01.02.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.2228 of 2022

1.Valliammal

2.Allimuthu

3.Vijayakumar

4.Dharmalingam

5.Sowbarnika

6.Kiuthika

...Petitioners

Vs.

The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Vadkkipalayam Police Station, Coimbatore District.

¶15

(Crime No.27 of 2022) ... Respondent

¶16

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent police concerned in crime No.27 of 2022, on the file of the respondent Police.

¶17

For Petitioners: Mr.P.Kalimuthu

¶18

For Respondent : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan

¶19

Additional Public Prosecutor

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 294(b), 323 of IPC and 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.27 of 2022, seek anticipatory bail.

¶22

The case of the prosecution is that there was a land dispute between the petitioners and the de facto complainant, as a result of which, the petitioners are said to have attacked the de facto complainant and caused simple injuries and there is a case in counter. Hence the complaint.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Accordingly, he prays for anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶24

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

¶25

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is almost completed.

¶26

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions made by both counsel and the investigation is almost completed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶27

Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days after lifting of lockdown or the commencement of the Court's normal functioning whichever is earlier, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Pollachi, 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, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶28

(a)the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

¶29

(b)the petitioners shall report before the respondent police every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for an interrogation;

¶30

(c)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶31

(d)the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶32

(e)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions has been imposed and the petitioners 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]; and;

¶33

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

¶34

(f)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

¶35

-sd/-

¶36

01/02/2022

¶37

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

¶38

TRUE COPY

¶39

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

¶40

¶41

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.I, POLLACHI

¶42

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COIMBATORE(FOR INFORMATION)

¶43

3 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADKKIPALAYAM POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE DISTRICT

¶44

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶45

CC to M/S P.KALIMUTHU Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶46

CRL OP.2228/2022

¶47

Date :01/02/2022

¶48

RVR 04/02/2022

¶49

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

Valliammal v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Valliammal 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

Ajith @ Ajith Kumar Vs State by

Ayyandurai Vs State Rep by

Velkumar Vs State Rep by

A.Rajendran Vs State Rep by

Manikandan Vs State Rep by

Suresh Vs State Rep by