Allowed

Subash v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC12 Jan 2022CRL OP(MD)/638/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to Subash, accused of illegally extracting gravel sand under Section 379 IPC/Section 21(1) MMDR Act, 1957, on conditions including a monetary deposit and appearing before police monthly.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on deposit of Rs.5,000/- and execution of bond for Rs.10,000/- with two sureties, appearing before police monthly.

Subash Vs The Inspector of Police — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.638 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 12/01/2022 PRESENT

¶3

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN

¶4

CRL OP(MD). No.638 of 2022

¶5

Subash ... Petitioner/Accused-4

¶6

¶7

The State rep.by The Inspector of Police, Vaiyampatty Police Station, Manapparai, Trichy. Cr.No.9 of 2022. ... Respondent/Complainant

¶8

For Petitioner : M/s.MUTHU KUMARAN.R., Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.S.MANIKANDAN, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶9

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

¶10

PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 9 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶11

The petitioner/Accused No.4, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Section 379 I.P.C r/w. Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶12

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner said to have illegally extracting gravel sand, without valid license and permit. Therefore, the present case came to be registered.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. However, to show his bona fide , the petitioner has come forward to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the credit of Cr.No.9 of 2022 before the trial Court concerned.

¶14

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner said to have illegally extracting gravel sand, without valid license and permit. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

1/3

¶16

CRL OP(MD). No.638 of 2022

¶17

He further submitted that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner herein.

¶18

Considering the nature of the mineral involved, the antecedents of the petitioner and his willingness to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the credit of Crime Number, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶19

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed on condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/(Rupees Five Thousand only) to the credit of Cr.No.9 of 2022 before the trial Court concerned, without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court.

¶20

On such deposit being made, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manapparai, 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 learned Magistrate concerned. Due to COVID-19 pandemic situation, the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police once in a month i.e., on first Monday of every English Calender Month at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

¶21

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

¶22

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶23

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate / litigant concerned.

¶24

¶25

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MANAPPARAI.

¶26

2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY DISTRICT.

¶27

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

¶28

2/3

¶29

CRL OP(MD). No.638 of 2022

¶30

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAIYAMPATTY POLICE STATION, MANAPPARAI, TRICHY.

¶31

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

¶32

+1. CC to M/S. MUTHU KUMARAN.R. Advocate SR.No.1612 (F)

¶33

ORDER

¶34

SA/VR/SAR.4/04.02.2022/3P/6C

¶35

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

¶36

3/3

Subash v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subash 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Pandiyan Vs the State Rep.by

B.Vengatapathi Vs the State Rep by

Gandhimathi Vs State Rep by

Vasudevan Vs the State Rep.by

Logesh Vs State Rep by

R.Sanjai Vs State Rep by