RAMACHANDRAN v. THE STATE REP. BYTHE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE CSCID POLICE STATION
Case at a glance
Outcome
Bail refused
The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate withina period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready,failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate withina period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. sd/- 11/08/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of…
Judgment
Cause title
1BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT( Criminal Jurisdiction )Thursday, the Eleventh day of August Two Thousand ElevenPRESENTThe Hon`ble Ms. Justice R.MALACRL OP(MD) No.10400 of 2011RAMACHANDRAN... PETITIONER
/ ACCUSED NO.3 VsTHE STATE REP. BYTHE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE CSCID POLICE STATION, MADURAI, MADURAI UNIT, CR NO. 313/2011... RESPONDENT
/ COMPLAINANTFor Petitioner : M/S. S.MUNIYANDI AdvocateFor Respondent : M.A.RAMAR, Additional Public Prosecutor ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.
ORDER :
The Court Made the following order :-The petitioner/accused No.3 apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 6(4)of TNSD (RDCS) Order 1982 r/w 7(1)(a)(ii) of EC Act 1955 in Crime No.313of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.
The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was charged under Sections 6(4) of TNSD (RDCS) Order 1982 r/w7(1)(a)(ii) of EC Act 1955. He further submitted that the petitioner isarrayed as A3 and a case has been registered against 3 accused and A1 andA2 were already enlarged on bail and there is no previous antecedents and the petitioner is an innocent person and hence, he prays for enlargement on anticipatory bail.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side) would submit that a case was registered against the petitioner and other accused in Crime No.313 of 2011 and hence, he prays for dismissal of this application.
Considering the rival submissions made by both sides, I aminclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.9,000/- to the credit of CrimeNo.313 of 2011 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III,Madurai, and on receipt of the same, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Madurai, and executing a bond for asum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each fora like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2further condition that the petitioner shall report before the Courtconcerned daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C.,scrupulously.
Operative part
The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate withina period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. sd/- 11/08/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.IIIMADURAI.2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATEMADURAI.3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICECSCID POLICE STATION,MADURAI, MADURAI UNIT.4. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTORMADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.+1. CC to M/S. S.MUNIYANDI Advocate SR. No.27302 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10400 of 2011 Date :11/08/2011RJ/16.8.112p/6c
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate withina period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready,failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.