Partly allowed

M.Rajendra Pandian v. The Sub Inspector of Police

Madras HC6 Oct 2022CRL OP(MD)/17805/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case involving Sections 420, 406, and 506(ii) IPC. Court directed police to conduct inquiry, register FIR, or close it within four weeks, and ordered petitioner's non-arrest during this period.

What did the court decide?

Police directed to conduct inquiry, register FIR or close petition within four weeks; petitioner not to be arrested during this period.

M.Rajendra Pandian Vs The Sub Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

CRL OP(MD).No.17805 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 06/10/2022

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶7

CRL OP(MD).No.17805 of 2022

¶8

M.Rajendra Pandian ... Petitioner/Accused

¶9

Vs The State Rep.by The Sub Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai Police Station, Madurai. (Crime No. Not Known of 2022) ... Respondent/Complainant

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prabakran, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶11

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

¶12

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. Not Known of 2022 on the file of the respondent Police.

¶13

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶14

The petitioner/Accused, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No. Not Known of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶15

2.Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petition enquiry is pending against the petitioner.

¶16

3.The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent police is harassing the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

¶17

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

¶18

1/2

¶19

CRL OP(MD).No.17805 of 2022

¶20

4.Considering the facts and circumstances, the respondent police is directed to conduct the enquiry and if any prima facie made out against the petitioner, register the F.I.R or close the petition enquiry within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Further, the petitioner is directed to co-operate for the enquiry. In the meanwhile, the petitioner shall not be arrested.

¶21

5.With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

¶22

/ TRUE COPY /

¶23

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶24

vsd

¶25

TO:

¶26

1.The Sub Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai Police Station, Madurai.

¶27

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶28

+1 CC to M/s.C.PRABAKARAN, Advocate ( SR-11130[I] dated 10/10/2022 )

¶29

CRL OP(MD) No.17805 of 2022

¶30

RD/SVR(11/10/2022) 2P 4C

¶31

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

¶32

2/2

M.Rajendra Pandian v. The Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Rajendra Pandian v. The Sub Inspector of Police

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

K.K. Karthick Kumar @ Karthick Vs The Inspector of Police

K.K. Saravanan Vs The Inspector of Police

J.Shantha Vs Gowri

Karuppasamy Vs The Inspector of Police

Pandi Vs The Inspector of Police

Sekar Vs The Inspector of Police