Allowed

D Manoj v. the State Rep by Its

Madras HC2 Dec 2024CRL OP/29154/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail sought by a petitioner arrayed as A6 in a robbery case involving house trespass, armed threat and taking of phones and cash. The court granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions including surrender within fifteen days, bond with sureties, daily police reporting and non-tampering.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with conditions including bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and surrender within fifteen days.

D Manoj Vs the State Rep by Its — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.29154 of 2024

¶2

Crl.O.P.No.29154 of 2024

¶3

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

¶4

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.310 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 310(2) and 311 of BNS, the present petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail.

¶5

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with other accused, trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant, caused life threat by showing knife and sickle, robbed three cell phones and a sum of Rs.17,500/- and attacked the defacto complainant. Hence, the case.

¶6

Pleading innocence on the part of the petitioner, false implication in the case, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, based on the confession statement given by the arrested accused, the petitioner has been arrayed as A6. He would submit that the

¶7

petitioner got admission in Ukraine university and due to the war, the petitioner was forced to return to India. He would also submit that A3 and A5 were arrested and subsequently released on bail. He further submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition

¶8

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

¶9

Page No.1 of 4

¶10

Crl.O.P.No.29154 of 2024

¶11

that may be imposed by this Court.

¶12

The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police, opposing for grant of anticipatory bail, is that the petitioner, along with other accused, trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant, threatened him with knife and sickle, committed robbery by taking three cell phones and a sum of Rs.17,500/- and attacked the defacto complainant. He would submit that the petitioner has one previous case registered under the Prohibition Act. He would also submit that some of the accused have been granted bail, while others remain in custody.

¶13

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions and accordingly the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Coimbatore, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), each with two sureties

¶14

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

¶15

Page No.2 of 4

¶16

Crl.O.P.No.29154 of 2024

¶17

(one of the surety shall be either the father or the mother of the petitioner) 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 said Magistrate, on further condition that:

¶18

[a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;

¶19

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 06.30 p.m., until further orders.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

[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];

¶23

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

¶24

02.12.2024

¶25

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

¶26

Page No.3 of 4

¶27

Crl.O.P.No.29154 of 2024

¶28

Lpp

¶29

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

¶30

Lpp

¶31

Crl.O.P.No.29154 of 2024

¶32

02.12.2024

¶33

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

¶34

Page No.4 of 4

D Manoj v. the State Rep by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D Manoj v. the State Rep by Its

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

Avinash @ Appu Vs the State Rep by

Saravanakumar Vs the State Rep by Its

Abinath S Vs the State Rep by

M.Prince Vs Inspector of Police

Sundara Boopathi Raja Vs the State Rep by

Boopathi P Vs the State Represented by