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

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
BHARANI @ BHARANIDHARAN – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE REP BY – Respondent
CRL OP 11818/2022



Advocates:
['M/S T VINOTH KUMAR', '', 'SONAI POTHIRAJAN', 'PUBLIC PROSECUTOR']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

Monday, the Sixth day of June Two Thousand Twenty Two

PRESENT

The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.11818 of 2022

AGAINST

S.C.No.57 OF 2022

(On the file of I Additional Assistant Sessions Court, Villupuram)

BHARANI @ BHARANIDHARAN

[ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

Vs

THE STATE REP BY, [ RESPONDENT ]

STATION HOUSE OFICER,

THIRUKOVILUR POLICE STATION,

VILLUPURAM DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.293/2015

For Petitioner : M/S.T.VINOTH KUMAR Advocate

For Respondent : M/S. A.DAMODARAN, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody

on 10.01.2022 on execution of Non-Bailable Warrant issued by the

learned I Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Villupuram for the

offence under Sections 294(b), 324, 506(ii), 307 and 34 of IPC in

S.C.No.57 of 2022 in respect of crime No.293 of 2015, seeks bail.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner was

arrayed as an accused in crime No.293 of 2015 under Sections 294(b),

324, 506(ii), 307 and 34 of IPC and on filing of charge sheet, the

same was taken cognizance by the learned I Additional Assistant

Sessions Judge, Villupuram in SC.No.57 of 2022, which is pending.

Thereafter, the petitioner did not appear before the lower Court

regularly. Hence, the lower Court has issued Non-Bailable Warrant

against the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner was produced

before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thirukovilur through P.T.

Warrant on 10.01.2022.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit

that the non-appearance before the lower Court by the petitioner is

neither wilful nor wanton. However, he would also submit that the

petitioner is ready to abide any condition as imposed by this Court

and seeks for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the

petitioner herein is the accused in SC.No.57 of 2022. Due to non-

appearance of the petitioner before the lower Court, the trial judge

has issued Non-Bailable Warrant on 31.08.2017 against the petitioner

and the petitioner was produced through P.T. warrant only on

10.01.2022, and if the bail is granted to the petitioner, it is very

difficult to secure him. Hence, he vehemently objected for grant of

bail to the petitioner.

5.It is seen that after completion of investigation, the

respondent filed final report and the same has been taken cognizance

in SC.No.57 of 2022 on the file of the learned I Additional Assistant

Sessions Judge, Villupuram. However, the petitioner was absent before

the trial court. As such on NBW, he was produced through P.T warrant

on 10.01.2022.

6.Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this

Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the

petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond

for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two blood

related sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the

learned Judicial Magistrate, Thirukovilur, Villupuram District and on

further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb

Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of

their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

[b] the petitioner shall report before trial Court viz.,

I Additional Assistant Sessions Court, Villupuram daily at 10.30 a.m

and 05.30 p.m. until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation

or trial.

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness

either during investigation or trial.

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the lea

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top