VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2023 › High Court of Madras

K.Suresh v. The Inspector of Police

GRANTED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
18 December 2023
Bench
V.Sivagnanamauthor
Case no.
CRL OP(MD) 22767/2023

Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 18/12/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.SIVAGNANAM K.Suresh, ... Petitioner/Accused 1

Vs The Inspector of Police, Alangulam Police Station, Tirunelveli District. Crime No.189/2023. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.GAVIN SILVESTER.J, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.RMS.SETHURAMAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C. PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.189/2023 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A1, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

29.06.2023 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 448, 294(b),323,324,302, 506(ii) of IPC @ Sections 448,294(b),323,324,302 and 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.189 of 2023, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity regarding land dispute on 29.06.2023 the accused persons entered into the house of the defacto complainant and attacked the son of the defacto complainant indiscriminately with aruval and caused his death. Further they also attacked the wife and daughter of the defacto complainant. Hence the case.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody from

29.06.2023, hence he seeks bail.

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor due to previous enmity regarding land dispute on 29.06.2023 the accused persons entered into the house of the defacto complainant and attacked the son of the defacto complainant indiscriminately with aruval and caused his death. Further they also attacked the wife and daughter of the defacto complainant , hence he objected to grant bail to the petitioner. However he fairly concedes that investigation has been completed and final report has been filed before the concerned Court.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances and also considering the period of incarceration and also taking into consideration the fact that the investigation has been completed and final report has been filed before the concerned Court and also taking into consideration the principle stated by the Honourable Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra and others vs. CBI reported in (2012)1 SCC 40, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [i] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alangulam, Tirunelveli Disrict and on further conditions that:

(ii) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate/concerned court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity;

(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alangulam, Tirunelveli District once in 15 days at 10.30 am., until further orders.

(iv)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness;

(v)the petitioner shall not abscond during trial.

(vi) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. CRLeOP(MD).eNo.22767eofe2023 oooooovii)Ifotheoaccusedothereafteroabsconds,oaofreshoFIRocanobeoregisteredounderoSection 229AoIPC. oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooosd/- oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo o ooooo18/12/2023 oooo ooooooooooo/oTRUEoCOPYo/ ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooo18/12/2023 ooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooSub-AssistantoRegistraro(C.S.oooo) ooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooMaduraioBenchoofoMadrasoHighoCourt, ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooMaduraio-o625o023.oo AAV TO 1ooTHEoJUDICIALoMAGISTRATE, ALANGULAM,oTIRUNELVELIoDISTRICT. 2oDOoTHROUGHoTHEoCHIEFoJUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,oTIRUNELVELIoDISTRICT. 3ooTHEoOFFICERoINCHARGE, SUBoJAIL,oPERAOORANI,oTHOOTHUKUDIoDISTRICT. 4oTHEoINSPECTORoOFoPOLICE, ALANGULAMoPOLICEoSTATION, TIRUNELVELIoDISTRICT.o 5ooTHEooADDITIONALoPUBLICoPROSECUTOR, MADURAIoBENCHoOFoMADRASoHIGHoCOURT,o MADURAI.oo +1 CC to M/s.J.GAVIN SILVESTER, Advocate ( SR-17940[I] dated 18/12/2023 ) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.22767 of 2023 Date :18/12/2023 SA/SAR. /18.12.2023/5P/7C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023.

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.