Senthil v. State by
Case brief
What is this about?
In a bail petition under Sections 439(1)(b) and 482 Cr.P.C., the Madras High Court released the petitioner accused of POCSO offences on an own bond, waiving the requirement for a blood relative surety, and directed his daily appearance trial court.
What did the court decide?
The petitioner was directed to be released on own bond; the condition requiring a blood relative as a surety was relaxed; the petitioner must appear in trial court daily.
What the court decided
Crl.O.P.No.3264 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.03.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
Crl.O.P.No.3264 of 2024
Senthil
... Petitioner/A2
Vs.
The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thiruvarur. (Crime No.29 of 2022) ... Respondent / Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439(1)(b) r/w Section 482 of Cr.P.C., prayed to set aside and modify the condition imposed in Crl.M.P.No.353 of 2023 dated 18.10.2023 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge / in Full Additional Charge of Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Thiruvarur.
For Petitioner : Mr. K.Shivakumar
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the condition requiring a blood relative as a surety can be relaxed when a blood relative cannot produce one.
Whether bail conditions can be modified to release the accused on an own bond instead.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Senthil
- respondent
The State
Coram
C.V. Karthikeyan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court