Libertatem Magazine

Madras HC Denies Bail in a Case Involving the Charges of Assault

Contents of this Page

The writ petition filed under Section 14A (2) of the SC/ST (POA) Amended Act, 2016, in Madras High Court. In the case of Vinester v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tamil Nadu, and Ors. The filing was to set aside the order dated 20.07.2020 made in Cr.M.P. No. 1008 of 2020. Justice Mr R. Tharani heard and disposed of the matter of writ petition. 

Facts of the Case

Allegedly, the appellant has assaulted the victim, Jeniston, and subsequently, threatened the de facto complainant to file a complaint against it. But on 03.05.2020, a case was registered against the appellant under Section 302, 506(ii), 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 3 of POA Act. The appellant was hence taken in custody on 04.05.2020. When the appellant filed a bail petition, it was dismissed on 20.07.2020.

Arguments of the Parties

The petitioner contended that the order dated 20.07.2020 of CrMP No. 1008/2020 should be set aside and leave the appellant on bail. The appellant is in custody since the last 93 days on a false case that is made against him. The appellant agrees to follow all the conditions set by Court for the appeal to be allowed.

The respondents contended that the offence committed by the appellant is grave, and along with that, the charge sheet is ready to be filed. Also, the appellant’s father has been threatening the witnesses. Hence, bail of the appellant will result in interference with the investigation. 

Observation of the Court

The Court observed that even though the appellant has been in custody since the last 93 days, there has been no charge-sheet and hence, he is entitled to statutory bail. The Court imposed certain conditions:

  1. The appellant has to create a bond of Rs. 10,000/- along with two sureties, of whom one should be a blood relative.
  2. The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and a copy of Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book for confirmation of identity.
  3. No interference by the appellant in the investigation.
  4. Cooperation of the appellant with respondents for investigation.
  5. The appellant should not leave the city and district.
  6. The appellant shall present himself twice at a police station assigned at 10 am and 5 pm.

Breach of any condition will result in Court taking appropriate action against the appellant.

The Decision of the Court

After hearing the parties and as per the circumstances in the case, the Court disposed of the petition. is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

About the Author