Allowed

Palanisamy v. the State Rep by

Madras HC16 Dec 2024CRL OP/31366/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras disposed of a bail petition filed by a person accused of suicide abetment (Sections 85 and 108 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita). The Court granted bail subject to sureties and strict conditions including daily police reporting.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was ordered to be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs. 15,000 with two sureties and complying with strict reporting and conduct conditions.

Palanisamy Vs the State Rep by — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.31366 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 16.12.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

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

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.31366 of 2024

¶7

Palanisamy ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Steel Plant Police Station, Salem District. (Crime No.350 of 2024). ... Respondent

¶10

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in connection with Crime No.350 of 2024, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.A.M.Esakkiappan For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side) O R D E R

¶12

Petition seeking bail in respect of Crime No.350 of 2024 registered

¶13

under Section 194 of BNSS and later, altered to the offence punishable under Sections 85 and 108 of BNS.

¶14

The incarceration of the petitioner being from 29.11.2024 pleading https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/4

¶15

Crl.O.P.No.31366 of 2024

¶16

innocence on the part of the petitioner and false implication in the case, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court. He also submits that the petitioner married the victim/deceased 18 years ago and they have two children. He further submits that on the alleged date of occurrence, there arouse a quarrel between the petitioner and the victim, due to which, the victim had committed suicide and there is no material to show that the petitioner had abetted the victim to commit suicide. He also submits that there is no demand of dowry and major part of the investigation is over and further, the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this court.

¶17

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 since the petitioner had refused the victim to visit her brother's wife, who was admitted to the hospital, there was a quarrel between them and due to which, the victim had committed suicide by consuming poison. He further submits that the RDO enquiry is pending.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

Crl.O.P.No.31366 of 2024

¶21

bail to the petitioner with certain conditions and accordingly, the petitioner is

¶22

ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/-

¶23

(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties , each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Salem, and on further conditions that:

¶24

[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;

¶25

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

[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 earned 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];

¶29

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

¶30

Crl.O.P.No.31366 of 2024

¶31

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA., J.

¶32

ham

¶33

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

16.12.2024

ham

The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Salem.

¶38

The Inspector of Police, Steel Plant Police Station, Salem District.

¶39

The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem.

¶40

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶41

Crl.O.P.No.31366 of 2024

¶42

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

Palanisamy v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Palanisamy 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

Rajkumar Vs State Rep by Its

F.Raja Vs State Rep by

R.Sivasankari Vs the State Rep. by

Manikandan Vs the State Rep by, the Inspector of Police

P.Nirosha Vs State Rep. by the Inspector of Police

S Arputharaj Vs State Rep.by