Allowed

Ramachandran v. Home, Prohibition and Excise Department

Madras HC21 Aug 2024CRL OP/13945/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court converted interim anticipatory bail into absolute anticipatory bail after verifying the petitioner's compliance with prior conditions. The bail was granted subject to conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence, leaving India without permission, and other standard protections.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted/confirmed with conditions.

Ramachandran Vs Home, Prohibition and Excise Department — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P. No. 13945 of 2024

¶2

Crl.O.P. No. 13945 of 2024

¶3

P. DHANABAL, J

¶4

Earlier, this court had granted interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner by order dated 27.06.2024 directing him to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to the Credit of Crime No. 5 of 2023 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order.

¶5

Today, when the matter taken up for hearing under the

¶6

caption “For reporting compliance”, both the learned counsels for the petitioner and the intervenor/de-facto complainant appeared and submitted that as per the conditions imposed by this court, the petitioner has been complied with by order dated 27.06.2024. Accordingly, the petitioner's counsel seeks to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶7

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that since the petitioner has been complied with the earlier order passed by this Court, the interim anticipatory bail granted by this court vide order dated 27.06.2024 is made absolute with certain conditions 1/3

¶8

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

¶9

Crl.O.P. No. 13945 of 2024

¶10

that:-

¶11

[a] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶12

[b] the petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court.

¶13

[c] 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].

¶14

[d] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

21.08.2024

MSM

P. DHANABAL, J

2/3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

Crl.O.P. No. 13945 of 2024

¶20

MSM

¶21

Crl.O.P.No. 13945 of 2024

¶22

21.08.2024

¶23

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

Ramachandran v. Home, Prohibition and Excise Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramachandran v. Home, Prohibition and Excise Department

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

M.Sundaresan Vs State Rep by

R.Rajkumar Vs State by Inspector of Police Crime

Ranjith Vs The State Rep by

Ravikaran Vs State Rep by

Harish Vs the State Rep by Its

Jeevan Vs State, rep. by