Madras High Court
CRL OP(MD)/23664/2013 of PATTANI Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE on 30 December 2013
BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Thirtieth day of December Two Thousand Thirteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.23664 of 2013 PATTANI ..PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs. STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALWAR THIRUNAGIRI POLICE STATION,
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Monday, the Thirtieth day of December Two Thousand ThirteenPRESENTThe Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASHCRL OP(MD) No.23664 of 2013
PATTANI
Vs.
..PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED
STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALWAR THIRUNAGIRI POLICE STATION,TUTICORIN DISTRICT. (CRIME NO. 237 OF 2013)..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
For Petitioner : M/S.S.R.DURAI RAJ Advocate For Respondent : Mr.A.P.BALASUBRAMANI, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondentpolice for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections379 of I.P.C. r/w Section 21 of Mines and Minerals Regulation Act incrime No.237 of 2013 and seeks anticipatory bail.2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit thatthe petitioner is nothing to do with the alleged commission of offenceand he has been falsely implicated in this case.
3. Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that thereare totally two accused in this case and the alleged occurrence is on21.12.2013 and the petitioner is the owner of the lorry, which wasinvolved in sand theft. He would further submit that the driver of thelorry has already been arrested and remanded to judicial custody andthere is no previous antecedents as against this petitioner.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court isinclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly,the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrestor on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate,Srivaikundam, and on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to thesatisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further conditionthat the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks. The petitioner shall comply withthe condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Scrupulously.
6. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistratewithin a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy madeready failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. sd/- 30/12/2013
/ TRUE COPY /
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)
TO
1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SRIVAIKUNDAM, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.2 -DO-THRO'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THOOTHUKUDI.3 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI.4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALWAR THIRUNAGIRI POLICE STATION,TUTICORIN DISTRICT.
+1. CC to M/S.S.R.DURAI RAJ Advocate SR.No.64472 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.23664 of 2013 Date :30/12/2013PBK 31/12/2013 2P/6C