A single-judge bench of the Madras High Court comprising Justice G. Ilangovan set free a petitioner under custody considering that he misbehaved with the female appellant (defacto complainant) when he was in a drunken state. The court made the appellant sign an affidavit that the mistake would not happen again. Several conditions were also directed to be fulfilled by the petitioner after getting the bail.
Brief Facts:
The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the defacto complainant lodged a complaint stating that on 27.11.2022 after purchasing the vegetables in the Gudalur weekly market, she was standing in front of the market at about 08.00 p.m., the accused came to the place in drunken mood and demanded her cell phone. When she objected the same, he insisted and caused trouble and also misbehaved with her. Later he left that place. On the basis of the above-said occurrence, she lodged a complaint. Therefore, the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.12.2022. Ever since he stayed in custody. Seeking bail, he moved to the Special Court and that was dismissed. Against this, this appeal was preferred.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The appellant contended that in a drunken mood, the petitioner misbehaved with her. They belonged to the upper caste and if he is released on bail, there is every likelihood of causing trouble again. Further, the petitioner is a habitual offender against whom, several proceedings under Sections 107 and 110 Cr.P.C. have been initiated. Apart from that he is also having two previous cases under IPC offences and he is a frequent troublemaker.
Observations of the Court:
The court observed the list of cases where the petitioner was involved earlier, provided by the learned Government Advocate. A perusal of the list showed that some of the cases have been disposed of and some of the cases ended in acquittal. The court concluded that this showed that the petitioner is not having and keeping good conduct. But however, after considering the period of incarceration and also considering the fact that the above-said misbehavior was alleged to have been caused by the petitioner in a drunken mood, the court of first instance directed him to file an undertaking affidavit before the Court. He had also produced an undertaking affidavit stating that the above-said occurrence was committed by mistake. After considering the above said undertaking affidavit, the judges allowed this appeal and granted bail to the appellant with certain conditions which were as follows:
- the appellant shall file an undertaking affidavit to the effect that he will not make any trouble to the defacto complainant in future;
- the appellant shall appear before the concerned court, daily at 10:30 a.m. until further orders;
- the appellant shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
- the appellant shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
- On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the appellant in accordance with law, as if the conditions have been imposed and the appellant has been released on bail by the Trial Court itself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560].
Decision of the Court:
Case No.: Crl. A(MD) No. 18 of 2023
Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. S. Sabbani Karbura Jothi
Advocate for the Respondents:Mr. M. Sakthi Kumar (For R1 and R2)
Mr. R. Rajaraman (For R3)
Read Judgment ;
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
0 Comments