Allowed

Ketan Mithalal Dhedhi v. State Rep by

Madras HC13 Dec 2024CRL MP/16382/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court modified the bail condition, directing the petitioner to appear before the Peelamedu Police Station in Coimbatore daily for four weeks starting 16.12.2024, instead of reporting to Madipakkam Police Station in Chennai.

What did the court decide?

Bail condition modified to require appearance before Peelamedu Police Station, Coimbatore, daily at 10.30 a.m. for four weeks.

Ketan Mithalal Dhedhi Vs State Rep by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.M.P.No.16382 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 13.12.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.DHANABAL

¶6

Crl.M.P.No.16382 of 2024 in Crl.OP.No.22651 of 2024

¶7

Ketan Mithalal Dhedhi

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, E2 Peelamedu Police Station, Coimbatore District. Crime No.498 of 2024. ... Respondent

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sasikumar

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.S.Balaji

¶13

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

This petition has been filed to modify the condition imposed on the

¶16

petitioner in para 6(a) that the petitioner as to sign before the Madipakkam Police Station, Chennai instead of that, the petitioner shall report before the respondent police station daily at 10.30 a.m, until further orders, in

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/4

¶18

1/4

¶19

Crl.M.P.No.16382 of 2024

¶20

Crl.OP.No.22651 of 2024 dated 13.09.2024.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to

¶22

comply with the condition in another case at Madipakkam, the petitioner is unable to comply with the condition in this case. Now he is ready to comply with the condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks modification.

¶23

The learned Government Advocate [criminal side] appearing for

¶24

the respondent police would submit that the petitioner has not complied the condition and hence objected to modify the condition.

¶25

Considering the said submission that the petitioner has not complied with the condition before the Madipakkam Police Station, thereby unable to comply the condition in this case, this Court is inclined to modify the condition to the effect that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police/Peelamedu Police Station, Coimbatore District from 16.12.2024, everyday at 10.30 a.m, for a period of four weeks”.

¶26

13.12.2024

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/4

¶28

2/4

¶29

Crl.M.P.No.16382 of 2024

¶30

drl

¶31

¶32

The Inspector of Police, E2 Peelamedu Police Station, Coimbatore District.

¶33

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/4

¶35

Crl.M.P.No.16382 of 2024

¶36

P.DHANABAL, J .

¶37

drl

¶38

Crl.M.P.No.16382 of 2024 in Crl.OP.No.22651 of 2024

¶39

13.12.2024

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/4

Ketan Mithalal Dhedhi v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ketan Mithalal Dhedhi v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar Majhi Vs State of Tn

Sonaj S Sabu Vs the State Rep by Its

Madhan Vs the State Rep by Its

The Management of Pentadaewha Vs the Presiding Officer

Munusamy Vs State by Inspector of Police

Thiyagarajan Vs The State by