Arun and Others Vs. State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Dindigul District

Arun and Others vs State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Dindigul District

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided May 11, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1190959

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1190959
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: P. Kalaiyarasan
Decided On: May 11, 2016
Case Number: Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 8025 of 2016
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Arun and Others

Respondent

State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Dindigul District

Excerpt

(prayer: criminal original petition filed under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure, praying to direct the learned principal district and sessions court, (pcr) dindigul to consider the bail application of the petitioners / accused to be filed in crime no.105 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police and to accept their surrender on the same day on merits.) 1. this petition has been filed, seeking to direct the learned principal district and sessions court, (pcr) dindigul, to consider the bail application of the petitioners on the same day of surrender and dispose of the same on the same date on merits and in accordance with law in crime no.105 of 2016. 2. learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been implicated in this case for the alleged offences under sections 147, 148, 324, 506(ii) ipc r/w 3(2)(va) of sc/st act in crime no.105 of 2016 and that in view of the specific bar under section 18 of the said act, the petitioners cannot move any anticipatory bail application and therefore, the petitioners have come forward with the said prayer. 3. learned government advocate (criminal side) takes notice for the respondent. 4. considering the submissions of both sides and also considering the nature of the prayer in this case in view of the specific bar under section 18 of the s.c. and s.t. (prevention of atrocities) act that the petitioners cannot move any anticipatory bail, the learned principal district and sessions court, (pcr) dindigul, is directed to accept the surrender of the petitioners and consider their bail applications, in the event of the petitioners filing such petitions in crime no.105 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police, and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law on the same day. with this observation, this petition is disposed of accordingly.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to direct the learned Principal District and Sessions Court, (PCR) Dindigul to consider the bail application of the petitioners / accused to be filed in Crime No.105 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police and to accept their surrender on the same day on merits.)

1. This petition has been filed, seeking to direct the learned Principal District and Sessions Court, (PCR) Dindigul, to consider the bail application of the petitioners on the same day of surrender and dispose of the same on the same date on merits and in accordance with law in Crime No.105 of 2016.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been implicated in this case for the alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 324, 506(ii) IPC r/w 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST Act in Crime No.105 of 2016 and that in view of the specific bar under Section 18 of the said Act, the petitioners cannot move any anticipatory bail application and therefore, the petitioners have come forward with the said prayer.

3. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) takes notice for the respondent.

4. Considering the submissions of both sides and also considering the nature of the prayer in this case in view of the specific bar under Section 18 of the S.C. and S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act that the petitioners cannot move any anticipatory bail, the learned Principal District and Sessions Court, (PCR) Dindigul, is directed to accept the surrender of the petitioners and consider their bail applications, in the event of the petitioners filing such petitions in Crime No.105 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police, and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law on the same day.

With this observation, this petition is disposed of accordingly.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties Arun and Others vs State Represented by The Inspector of Poli... Same Subject Criminal Same Judge P. Kalaiyarasan