Allowed

Vigneshwaran v. the State Represented by

Madras HC9 Feb 2024CRL OP/1723/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought bail for an offence under Section 392 IPC relating to robbing Rs.20,000 from the defacto complainant. Considering his period of incarceration and that co-accused had been granted bail, the Court granted bail on stringent conditions including thrice-daily police reporting.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on executing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions including reporting thrice daily before respondent police until further orders.

Vigneshwaran Vs the State Represented by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.1723 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 09.02.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.1723 of 2024

¶7

Vigneshwaran

¶8

...Petitioner/Accused-2

¶9

Vs.

¶10

State represented by The Inspector of Police, B-5, Walajabad Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

¶11

(Crime No.937 of 2023) ...Respondent

¶12

PRAYER:

¶13

Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail concerned in Crime No.937 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police on such terms and conditions.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.C.D.Sugumar For Respondent : Mr.L.Baskaran Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶15

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

¶16

Crl.O.P.No.1723 of 2024

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner /A1 in Crime No.937 of 2023, registered by the

¶19

respondent police for the offence under Section 392 of IPC, seeks bail. The petitioner had been remanded to judicial custody on 12.12.2023.

¶20

2.It is the case of the prosecution that on 08.12.2023, the defacto complainant was intercepted by all the accused and they threatened and a sum of Rs.20,000/- was robbed.

¶21

3.It is stated that A3 is still absconding and A2 had been granted bail. This petitioner is working as Armed Reserve Police but however, taking into consideration the period of incarceration, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

¶22

4.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to 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 Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Kancheepuram District, and on further conditions that: -

¶23

[a] 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.

¶24

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police

¶25

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

¶26

2/4

¶27

Crl.O.P.No.1723 of 2024

¶28

everyday morning at 10.00 a.m., afternoon at 2.00 p.m., and evening at 6.00 p.m., until further orders.

¶29

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶30

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶31

[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 [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

¶32

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

¶33

5.The respondent police may forward a report to the District Superintendent of Police, Kancheepuram District, regarding the suitability of the petitioner to continue in service.

¶34

09.02.2024

¶35

ata

¶36

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN. J.

¶37

3/4

¶38

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

¶39

Crl.O.P.No.1723 of 2024

¶40

ata

¶41

¶42

1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Kancheepuram District.

¶43

2.Central Prison, Puzhal.

¶44

3.The Inspector of Police, B-5, Walajabad Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

¶45

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶46

Crl.O.P.No.1723 of 2024

¶47

09.02.2024

¶48

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

Vigneshwaran v. the State Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vigneshwaran v. the State Represented by

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

Krishnan Vs Inspector Of Police

Kamalakkannan Vs State Rep.by

Erusappan Vs the State

P.Raji Vs State Rep.by Its

Jayakrishnan Vs State Rep by

Shajakhan @ Kadhar Basha Vs State Rep by