Dismissed

Maria Mettilda v. the State Rep by Its

Madras HC27 Apr 2022CRL OP/5303/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Original Petition filed for anticipatory bail was dismissed. The petitioner, previously granted bail with a condition to deposit Rs. 10 lakhs within eight weeks, failed to comply for over two years in an embezzlement case, rendering the present petition meritless.

What did the court decide?

Petition for anticipatory bail dismissed due to failure to comply with earlier bail conditions regarding fee deposit.

Maria Mettilda Vs the State Rep by Its — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Wednesday, the Twenty Seventh day of April Two Thousand Twenty Two

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Dr Justice G. JAYACHANDRAN

¶6

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.5303 of 2022

¶7

MARIA METILDA [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

¶8

¶9

THE STATE REP BY ITS [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB-I,POLICE STATION, CHENNAI-600 007. (CR. NO.137/2019)

¶10

For Petitioner : M/S. NIRANJAN.S.KUMAR Advocate

¶11

For Respondent : MR.S.SANTHOSH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶12

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

¶13

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶14

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 409, 420, 506(i) and 34 of IPC, in Crime No.137 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶15

The petitioner herein approaches this Court earlier and has obtained anticipatory bail on specific condition that, he should deposit a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) to the credit of Crime No.137 of 2019 within a period of eight weeks. This order came to be passed on 07.02.2020. After lapse of two years, the present anticipatory bail petition was again filed.

¶16

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

¶17

The matter relates to embezzlement of more than 1.8 crores and after getting protection by way of anticipatory bail, the petitioner has failed to comply the order for the past two years. This Court, finds no merits in the present anticipatory bail petition, in which the petitioner herein just getting protection from this Court and not complying the condition imposed by this Court. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

¶18

-sd/-

¶19

27/04/2022

¶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.)

¶23

High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶24

¶25

1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB-1, POLICE STATION, CHENNAI-600 007.

¶26

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶27

+1CC to M/S. NIRANJAN.S.KUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.No.6613

CRL OP.5303/2022

Date :27/04/2022

CSK 04/05/2022

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

Maria Mettilda v. the State Rep by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maria Mettilda v. the State Rep by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Syed Shirajuddin Badsha Vs State/Central Rep.by

Thirumal Vs Union Territory of Puducherry Rep by

R.Thiruvenkadam Vs Station House Officer

P.Pandi Vs State Rep.by

G.Dhanasekaran Vs Mr.Jaikumar

Suresh Vs State Rep by