Allowed

G.Bhagiyalakshmi v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC5 Dec 2022CRL OP/29981/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a petition for anticipatory bail to petitioners facing charges under Sections 294(b), 324, and 506(ii) IPC. Bail was granted subject to conditions including Bond execution, deposit of Rs. 10,000 each, police reporting, and surrender for interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners ordered to be released on anticipatory bail upon deposit of Rs. 10,000 each and complying with conditions.

G.Bhagiyalakshmi Vs the Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.29981 of 2022

¶2

Crl.O.P.No.29981 of 2022

¶3

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

¶4

The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.355 of 2022, seek anticipatory bail.

¶5

The case of the prosecution is that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioners and the defacto complainant and that the petitioners have abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and assaulted her with knife resulting in her sustaining injuries. Hence, the complaint.

¶6

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and due to previous enmity, a false complaint has been given against them. The learned counsel, on instructions, would further submit that the petitioners, without prejudice to their rights, are ready to deposit the amount of Rs.10,000 /- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each to the credit of the crime number. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶7

Page 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶8

Crl.O.P.No.29981 of 2022

¶9

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioners and the defacto complainant and that the petitioners have abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and assaulted her with knife resulting in her sustaining injuries. He would also submit that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. He would further submits that A1 is still absconding. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶10

5.Heard both sides and perused the materials. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

¶11

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Egmore, on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a

¶12

Page 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶13

Crl.O.P.No.29981 of 2022

¶14

like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer

¶15

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:

¶16

[a] the petitioners shall deposit a amount of Rs.10,000 /- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each to the credit of the crime number within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Egmore, and on such deposit, the defacto complainant is permitted to withdraw the said deposit amount on proper identification and acknowledgment;

¶17

[b] the petitioners 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;

¶18

[c] 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 interrogation;

¶19

[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶20

Page 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

Crl.O.P.No.29981 of 2022

¶22

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

¶23

¶24

[e] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶25

[f] 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 have 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];

¶26

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can

¶27

be registered under Section 229A IPC.

¶28

05.12.2022

¶29

¶30

Crl.O.P.No.29981 of 2022

¶31

Page 4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

G.Bhagiyalakshmi v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Bhagiyalakshmi 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

Kuppusamy Vs Maruthalingam

Mr. R. Kirubaraj Vs Mr. S. Sheik Mohideen

M.Dharmalingam Vs Mr.C.Easwaran

Murukesan @ Murugesan Vs Inspector of Police

K.Karthick Vs State Rep by

Karthick Vs Intelligence Officer