Allowed

Sachin@Sachin Kumar v. the State Rep by

Madras HC9 Dec 2024CRL OP/30639/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail petition was allowed. The High Court directed the release of the petitioners on bail conditioned to execute a bond with sureties and adhere to specific restrictions on reporting and evidence tampering.

What did the court decide?

The petitioners were ordered to be released on bail by executing a separate bond for Rs.15,000/- with two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding reporting, non-absconding, and non-tamperin

Sachin@Sachin Kumar Vs the State Rep by — Corruption | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.30639 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 09.12.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.30639 of 2024

¶7

Sachin @ Sachin Kumar

¶8

Ginda @ Udhayanidhi ... Petitioners

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, D1, Triplicane Police Station, Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005. (Crime No.491 of 2024).

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioners on bail, in connection with Crime No.491 of 2024, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police.

¶13

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Shanmugam For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

Petition seeking bail in respect of Crime No.491 of 2024 registered

¶16

for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2),

¶17

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

¶18

Crl.O.P.No.30639 of 2024

¶19

125, 311 and 351 (3) of BNS, is on board for consideration.

¶20

The incarceration of the petitioners being from 21.11.2024 pleading innocence on the part of the petitioners and false implication in the case, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks indulgence of this Court. He also submits that only to keep the petitioners under fetters, the respondent had implicated the petitioners in this case. He also submits that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this court.

¶21

The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for grant of bail, is that the petitioners/A1 & A3 along with A2 had waylaid the de facto complainant, abused him in filthy language, assaulted him and by intimidating him at knife point, robbed a sum of Rs.250/- from him. He also submits that against the first petitioner/A1, three previous cases are pending and in respect of A3, two cases are pending.

¶22

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record, and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail

¶23

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

¶24

Crl.O.P.No.30639 of 2024

¶25

to the petitioners with certain conditions and accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing separate bond each for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties ( out of which, one surety should be a blood related surety), each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, and on further conditions that:

¶26

[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;

¶27

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police everyday at 06.30 p.m., until further orders;

¶28

[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶29

[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶30

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

¶31

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

¶32

Crl.O.P.No.30639 of 2024

¶33

in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

¶34

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA., J.

¶35

ham

¶36

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

09.12.2024

ham

The II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

¶41

The Inspector of Police, D1, Triplicane Police Station, Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005.

¶42

The Superintendent, Central Prison for men, Puzhal, Chennai.

¶43

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶44

Crl.O.P.No.30639 of 2024

¶45

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

¶46

4/4

Sachin@Sachin Kumar v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin@Sachin Kumar v. the 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

Sheik Dawood Vs State rep by

M.R.Raja Krishnan Vs The State by

Ferose Khan Vs the State represented by

M.Mala Vs the Inspector of Police (L and O)

Arikrishnan Vs the State Represented by

Murugesan Vs the State Rep.by