Madras High Court

CRL OP(MD)/16029/2020 of T.Surya Vs The Inspector of Police on 30 December 2020

Cites 0, Cited by 0

BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30/12/2020 PRESENT The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN CRL OP(MD). No.16029 of 2020 T.Surya ... Petitioner/Accused-1 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by it's Inspector of Police, Abiramam Police Station, Ramanathapuram. Crime No.530 of

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

Date : 30/12/2020PRESENT

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN

CRL OP(MD). No.16029 of 2020

T.Surya ... Petitioner/Accused-1

Vs

The State of Tamil NaduRep. by it's Inspector of Police,Abiramam Police Station, Ramanathapuram.

Crime No.530 of 2020. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.Bhagavath Singh, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.R.Erottuchamy,

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C.

PRAYER :-

For Bail in Crime No.530 of 2020 on the file of the RespondentPolice.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A1, who was arrested and remanded to judicialcustody on 13.12.2020 for the offences punishable under Sections294(b),323,324, 506(ii) and 307 of IPC on the file of the respondentpolice seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that due to pathway disputebetween the petiitoner and the defacto complainant the petitionerand other accused persons attacked the defacto complainant andcaused injuries and also made an attempt to murder him.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that thepetitioner is no way connected with the offence and he is innocent.https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/He would also submit that the injured was also discharged from thehospital.

4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) would submit thatthere are totally two accused in this case and the petitioner hereinis arrayed as A1. Due to pathway dispute between the petitionerand the defacto complainant the petitioner and other accusedpersons attacked the defacto complainant and caused injuries andalso made an attempt to murder him. He would also submit that theinjured was also discharged from the hospital and the co-accused inthis case was granted bail by the learned Principal District andSessions Judge, Ramanathapuram.

5. Taking note of the above facts and circumstances of the caseand also taking into consideration the period of incarceration andalso taking note of the fact that the injured was discharged fromthe hospital and also the fact that co-accused in this case wasgranted bail by the Court below, this Court is inclined to grantbail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bailon his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees TenThousand only) with two blood sureties each for a like sum to thesatisfaction of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,Kamuthi.

i) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumbimpression in the surety bond and the Magistrate/concerned court mayobtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure theiridentity

ii) the petitioner shall report before the respondent policedaily at 10.30 a.m until further orders.

iii)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness.

iv) the petitioner shall not abscond during trial.

v)On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learnedMagistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actionagainst the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditionshave been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learnedMagistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble SupremeCourt in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

vi) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can beregistered under Section 229A IPC.

sd/-

30/12/2020

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. Madurai - 625 023.

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic,a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but,ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correctcopy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigantconcerned.

TO

1. THE DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KAMUTHI. KAMUTHI.

2. DO-THROUGH : THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ABIRAMAM POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

5. THE OFFICER INCHARGE, DISTRICT PRISON, RAMANATHAPURAM.

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.16029 of 2020 Date :30/12/2020

AAV/SJI

TE/SMA/SAR-III : 30/12/2020 : 3P/6C

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead