Madras High Court
CRL OP/29627/2017 of AJITH @ MANIKANDAN, Vs STATE REP.BY on 28 December 2017
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction )
Thursday, the Twenty Eighth day of December Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr Justice R. PONGIAPPAN
CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.29627 of 2017
AJITH @ MANIKANDAN, [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]
Vs
STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ]INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUPPUR NORTH POLICE STATION, TIRUPPUR DISTRICT.CR.NO.1374 OF 2017.
For Petitioner : M/S.J.FRANKLIN Advocate For Respondent : MR.R. SEKAR, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)
PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Heard both sides.
2. The petitioner is arrayed as A3 in Crime No.1374/2017 onthe file of the respondent police. He apprehend arrest at thehands of the respondent police for the alleged offences u/s.147,294(b), 323, 324, and 307 IPC and he has filed this petition,seeking grant of anticipatory bail.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 11.12.2017, thepetitioner along with the other accused went to the cinematheatre to see a movie and were creating commotion by makingnoise and causing disturbance to the other audience and when thesaid act of the accused was questioned by the defacto complainant and his friend Mahendran, the accused attacked themindiscrinately and caused injuries on them and resulting in theregistration of the case.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitionersubmitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated inthis case, he has not committed any offence as alleged,he is inno way connected with the offences, and pleads for grant ofanticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. The learned Government Advocate submitted thatinvestigation is not yet completed. According to him, theinjured was discharged from hospital.
6. Considering the submissions of both sides, it seems thatthe occurrence was happened due to the wordy quarrel between thepetitioner and the defacto complainant. However, the learnedGovernment Advocate represented that the person who sustainedinjuries during the time of occurrence was discharged from thehospital after completing treatment.
7. Taking all the above said aspects into consideration,and having regard to the nature of offence,this Court come tothe conclusion that in order to complete investigation,custodial interrogation is not necessary, accordingly this Courtis inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subjectto the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner is granted anticipatory bail in the eventof his arrest or on his surrender before Judicial Magistrate,No.1, Tiruppur, on or before 11-01-2018, failing which thepetition shall stand dismissed automatically.
(ii) On such arrest or surrender, the petitioner is orderedto be enlarged on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.10,000/-with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of theJudicial Magistrate, No.1, Tiruppur.
(iii) The petitioner is directed to appear before therespondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. for a period of two weeks.
(iv) The petitioner shall make himself available forinterrogation as and when required by the investigation officer.
(v) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, theanticipatory bail granted to the petitioner shall standautomatically cancelled, and the learned Magistrate / TrialCourt is entitled to take appropriate action against thepetitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learnedMagistrate / Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon’bleSupreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW5560].
-sd/-
28/12/2017
This order, on being produced, be punctually observed andcarried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY
Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,NO.I, TIRUPPUR2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATETIRUPPUR (FOR INFORMATION)3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTORHIGH COURT, MADRAS.4 STATE REP.BYINSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUPPUR NORTH POLICE STATION, TIRUPPUR DISTRICT.CR.NO.1374 OF 2017.
+1 CC to M/S.J.FRANKLIN Advocate on payment of necessarycharges Sr.No.23411
CRL OP.29627/2017
Date :28/12/2017
MD: 29/12/2017