Allowed

Thanith Kumar @ Periyakarupu v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC18 Apr 2023CRL OP/5518/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, an accused in a case involving assault and outrage of modesty, subject to specific conditions including daily reporting, bond execution, and appearing before a Metropolitan Magistrate within fifteen days.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted, conditioned on execution of bond with sureties, daily reporting to police, and appearance before Magistrate within 15 days.

Thanith Kumar @ Periyakarupu Vs the Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.5518 of 2023

¶2

Crl.O.P.No.5518 of 2023

¶3

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

¶4

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 148, 294(b), 324, 427, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW

¶5

Act in Crime No.37 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶6

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused have attacked the defacto complainant's son and her sister's son and when it was questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioner along with other accused have abused her and assaulted her with wooden log and threatened her and also outraged her modesty by pulling her saree. Hence the case.

¶7

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and due to previous enmity, a false complaint has been given against him. He would further submit that the petitioner has nothing to do with the alleged offence and he is ready to abide Page 1 of 5

¶8

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

¶9

Crl.O.P.No.5518 of 2023

¶10

by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶11

The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the petitioner along with other accused have attacked the defacto complainant's son and when it was questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioner along with other accused have abused her and assaulted her with wooden log and threatened her and also outraged her modesty by pulling her saree. He would further submit that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶12

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) and perused the entire materials available on record.

¶13

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also of the fact Page 2 of 5

¶14

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

¶15

Crl.O.P.No.5518 of 2023

¶16

that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner, this Court is

¶17

inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶18

7.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the

¶19

event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate No.XIII, Egmore, Chennai, 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 the police officer, 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:

¶20

[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.

¶21

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 7.00 p.m., until further orders;

¶22

Page 3 of 5

¶23

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

¶24

Crl.O.P.No.5518 of 2023

¶25

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶26

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶27

[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

¶28

[(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

¶29

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC;

18.04.2023

vkr

Page 4 of 5

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

¶34

Crl.O.P.No.5518 of 2023

¶35

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

¶36

vkr

¶37

Crl.O.P.No.5518 of 2023

¶38

18.04.2023

¶39

Page 5 of 5

¶40

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

Thanith Kumar @ Periyakarupu v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thanith Kumar @ Periyakarupu 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

Rasu Kumar Vs Inspector of Police

Rajesh Kannan Vs State Rep.by Its

E. Naresh Kumar Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Syed Zameer Vs the State Rep by

N.Safeeq Vs State Rep.by

C Indrani Vs Inspector of Police