Allowed

Rajesh Kumar v. the State Rep.by

Madras HC4 Apr 2024CRL OP/3181/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought anticipatory bail for allegedly assaulting the defacto complainant with a knife during a bike theft. The court granted anticipatory bail on conditions, including depositing Rs.20,000 for the victim's benefit and daily reporting to police.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties; Rs.20,000 deposit ordered for victim; daily police reporting required.

Rajesh Kumar Vs the State Rep.by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.3181 of 2024

¶2

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

¶3

The petitioner who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence

¶4

under Sections 394, 397 IPC IPC in Crime No. 891 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶5

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 24.12.2023, the petitioner along with other accused persons standing nearby to his bike bearing registration No. TN 32 BD 3823 and the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, at that time the accused persons assaulted him with knife. Hence, the law enforcing agency registered a case against the petitioner.

¶6

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submit that

¶7

the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Further, he submitted that based on the confession the petitioner implicated

¶8

1/5

¶9

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

¶10

in this case. However, on instructions, the learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner, on his own volition, is ready and willing to contribute a some amount to the charitable purpose as imposed by this Court. Learned counsel prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶11

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl side) submits that

¶12

the petitioner along with other accused persons assaulted the defacto complainant with knife while stealing the defacto complainant's bike. Further, there are seven previous case pending against the petitioner. He vehemently oppose for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner has discharged from the hospital. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶14

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail

¶15

in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Judicial

¶16

2/5

¶17

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

¶18

magistrate - II, Villupuram, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a

¶19

bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each , with two sureties 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

¶20

[a] the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees TwentyThousand only) to the credit of crime No. 891 of 2023 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and the victim is permitted to withdraw the same.

¶21

[b] the petitioner and 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.

¶22

[c] the petitioner is directed to report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders

¶23

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or

¶24

3/5

¶25

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

¶26

witness either during investigation or trial.

¶27

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

¶28

[f] 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 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

¶29

Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

¶30

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a

¶31

fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

04.04.2024

pbl

4/5

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

¶36

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

¶37

pbl

¶38

Crl.O.P.No.3181 of 2024

¶39

04.04.2024

¶40

5/5

¶41

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

Rajesh Kumar v. the State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh 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

Rani Vs Forest Range Officer

Usman Sheriff Vs State Rep.by

Gummidipudi Balasubramaniyam @ Vijay Vs State, Rep. by

Ismayil Vs the State Rep. by

Srikanth Vs State Rep by

P.Pandiyan Vs State Rep by