Seethalakshmi v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 18.01.2021 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. BHARATHIDASAN Crl.O.P.No.284 of 2021 1.Seethalakshmi 2.Sangeetha ... petitioners Vs.

State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Peralam Police Station, Thiruvarur District.

(Crime No.2492 of 2020) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge Bail to the petitioners in the event of their arrest in Crime No.2492 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Muruganantham For Respondent : Mr.S.Karthikeyan Addl. Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 352 and 379 of IPC, r/w Section 4 of TNWH Act, in Crime No.2492 of 2020, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that a wordy quarrel arose between the defacto complainant and the petitioners, over certain drainage issue and the petitioners are alleged to have attacked the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and no way connected with this crime and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioners have assaulted the defacto complainant, due to which, the defacto complainant sustained injuries. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Taking into consideration, the nature of offence, the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nannilam, on condition that the petitioners shall execute 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] the petitioners and 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., as and when required for interrogation. [c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

-sd/- 18/01/2021 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NANNILAM 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THIRUVARUR(FOR INFORMATION)

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

4 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERALAM POLICE STATION, TIRUVARUR DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.T.MURUGANANTHAM Advocate on payment of necessary charges Sr.530 CRL OP.284/2021 Date :18/01/2021 RVR 22/01/2021