SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Mad) 2803

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G. ILANGOVAN, J.
Alexandar & Another – Appellants
Versus
State represented by The Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar – Respondent
Crl Op(MD). No. 16015 of 2023
Decided On : 08-09-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioners:M/s. M. Pandian, Advocates. For the Respondent: B. Nambiselvan, Additional Public Prosecutor.

Granting bail based on the presence or absence of previous cases and the nature of the current offense.

Headnote:

Bail - Threat and Assault - The court dismissed the bail petition for the first petitioner due to previous cases but granted bail to the second petitioner who had no previous cases, with conditions to ensure no further threats or assaults.

Fact of the Case:

The accused were arrested for threatening and assaulting the defacto complainant, leading to the registration of a complaint.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the bail petition for the first petitioner but granted bail to the second petitioner based on their previous cases and the nature of the current offense.

Issues: Bail petition for accused charged with threat and assault.

Ratio Decidendi: Granting bail based on the presence or absence of previous cases and the nature of the current offense.

Final Decision: The first petitioner's bail petition was dismissed, while the second petitioner was granted bail with conditions.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: For Bail in Crime No.41 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent Police.)

1. The petitioners / Accused herein, who was arrested on 05.08.2023 for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 341, 323, 150, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 25(1- A) of Arms Act, 1959, in Crime No.41 of 2023, on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 04.08.2023, at about 1.00 p.m., when the defacto complainant was proceeding to his house after worship, the accused persons alleged to have threatened the defacto complainant with deadly weapon, abused him in filthy language and attacked him. Hence the present complaint came to be registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocents, they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. They have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, they seek for the relief of bail.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that while pending trial process in S.T.C.No.97 of 2023, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchuli, threat was made to the witnesses by these petitioners and along with other persons to withdraw the case. Based upon the incident, a FIR has been registered and the petitioners were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.08.2023 and ever since they are in custody. The first accused is having three previous cases and so far as the second petitioner is concerned, he is not having any previous cases.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and also the fact that the first petitioner is having three previous cases, this Court is not inclined to grant relief to the first petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed, in so far as the first petitioner is concerned.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and also the fact that the second petitioner is not having any previous cases, this Court is inclined to grant relief to the second petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the second petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, on executing 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, Thiruchuli, and the second petitioner shall file an undertaking affidavit before the trial Court that they will not make any threat to the defacto complainant in future. If any complaint is received against the second petitioner, either by the respondent police or by the judicial magistrate, the bail granted to the second petitioner will stand automatically cancelled, without reference to this Court. The second petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top