Allowed

Raja @ Rengarajan v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC7 Sept 2022CRL OP(MD)/12756/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, accused No.2, who apprehended arrest for offences under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and IPC. The court imposed strict reporting conditions and a penal consequence for absconding.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; petitioner released on bail conditioned to execute a bond for Rs.10,000 with two sureties, report daily for two weeks, and not tamper with evidence or abscond.

Raja @ Rengarajan Vs The Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

CRL OP(MD).No.12756 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 07/09/2022

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice R.THARANI

¶7

CRL OP(MD).No.12756 of 2022

¶8

Raja @ Rengarajan ... Petitioner/Accused No.2

¶9

¶10

The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Karimedu Police Station, Madurai District. (Crime No.223/22)..

¶11

... Respondent/Complainant

¶12

For Petitioner : M/s.J.Vishnu, Advocate.

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶14

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

¶15

PRAYER :-

¶16

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.223/2022 on the file of the Respondent Police.

¶17

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶18

The petitioner/Accused No.2, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1), 4(1), 4(2)(a), 4(2)(c), 5(1)(a), 5(1)(d) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 and 370 A(2) of IPC in Cr.No.223 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶19

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/A2 and another accused are partners and they have run a unisex saloon at Madurai and committed the offence of immoral traffic. Hence the complaint.

¶20

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

¶21

1/3

¶22

CRL OP(MD).No.12756 of 2022

¶23

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. On the basis of the confession given by the accused No.1, this petitioner has been impleaded in this case and pray the petitioner to be released on anticipatory bail.

¶24

4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) submitted that there are totally four accused in this case. The first accused was arrested and released on bail. The petitioner is the second accused. The accused Nos.1 and 2 are partners in the business and and pray the petition to be dismissed.

¶25

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, considering the nature of offence and also considering the fact that the co-accused in this case has been released on bail, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶26

6.Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Madurai, 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 to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:

¶27

(a)the petitioner 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;

¶28

(b)the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

¶29

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

¶30

(d)the petitioner shall be present before the Court on hearing dates and before the respondent police as and when required;

¶31

(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]; and;

¶32

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

¶33

2/3

¶34

CRL OP(MD).No.12756 of 2022

¶35

(f)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC. sd/07/09/2022 / TRUE COPY /

¶36

/09/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.V, MADURAI.

¶37

2 DO THROUGH: THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI.

¶38

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KARIMEDU POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT.

¶39

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶40

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.12756 of 2022 pnn Date :07/09/2022 PKP/SBN/SAR-1/15.09.2022/3P/5C

¶41

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

¶42

3/3

Raja @ Rengarajan v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja @ Rengarajan 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

United India Insurance Vs S. Sridhar

M/S.United India Insurance Company Limited Vs S.Margret Rose

Velmurugan Vs The Inspector of Police

M.Malathi Vs Geethanjali

Thangiah Vs The Inspector of Police

Saravanan Vs The Sub Inspector of Police