Allowed

Barath @ Mooku Barath v. State Rep.by

Madras HC12 Mar 2024CRL OP/2458/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought bail for offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 307, 336, and 506(ii) of the IPC. The court considered the serious nature of allegations, the petitioner's 21 previous cases, and the charge sheet filing. Bail was granted subject to conditions including daily police reporting and execution of a bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to execution of a bond for Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and daily reporting to police at 10:30 a.m.

Barath @ Mooku Barath Vs State Rep.by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.2458 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 12.03.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

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

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.2458 of 2024

¶7

Barath @ Mooku Barath

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

State represented by Inspector of Police, G2 Periamet Police Station, Chennai. (Crime No.195 of 2023) ... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., prayed to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.195 of 2023 on the file of the respondent.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Jagan

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.L.Baskaran Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The petitioner/A1 who was arrested and remanded to judicial

¶16

custody on 01.09.2023, for the offences registered under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 307, 336, 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.195 of 2023 on the file of

¶17

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

¶18

Crl.O.P.No.2458 of 2024

¶19

the respondent Police, seeks bail.

¶20

The case of the prosecution is that owing to the previous enmity, the accused persons had attacked the defacto complainant on his right shoulder and his right side face.

¶21

The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) stated that the injured had been discharged from the hospital. There are 21 previous cases against the petitioner.

¶22

4.A counter affidavit had been filed wherein it had been stated that the charge sheet has been filed on 15.11.2023 before the II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore.

¶23

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that A2 to A4 had been granted bail by the Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai.

¶24

6.Taking all the factors into consideration and the period of incarceration, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

¶25

7.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 learned II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai and on further conditions that:-

¶26

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

¶27

Crl.O.P.No.2458 of 2024

¶28

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb

¶29

Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

¶30

[b]the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on

¶31

everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

[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].

¶35

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

¶36

12.03.2024

¶37

vkr

¶38

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

¶39

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

¶40

3/4

¶41

Crl.O.P.No.2458 of 2024

¶42

vkr

¶43

¶44

1.The II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

¶45

The Inspector of Police, G2 Periamet Police Station, Chennai. 3.The Central Prison, Puzhal 2.

¶46

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶47

Crl.O.P.No.2458 of 2024

¶48

12.03.2024

¶49

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

¶50

4/4

Barath @ Mooku Barath v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Barath @ Mooku Barath 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Murali Vs State Rep By Inspector Of Police

Murugan Vs the State Rep.by

Nagarajan Vs the State

Manickam Vs The Inspector of Police

P Sengodan Vs The Inspector Of Police

M.P.Suresh Kumar Vs the Inspector of Police