Krishnan v. The State Rep By Its,
T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 427 and 506(ii) of IPC r/w Section 4 of TNWH Act, in Crime No.372 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution as per the de-facto complainant is that the accused trespassed into his house and by abusing the de-facto complainant and his family members in a filthy language, had assaulted him with wooden log, iron rod and also damaged his vehicles. Hence the case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the de-facto complainant is an accused in POCSO case, in which he had taken the photographs of the girl belongs to the petitioners' family and when it was questioned by the petitioners there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioners and the de-facto complainant and in order to escape from his
case, the de-facto complainant has lodged a false complaint against the petitioners. He also stated that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that due to the previous enmity, the petitioners trespassed into the de-facto complainant's house, abused and assaulted him with weapons, causing simple injuries and they have also damaged his vehicles. He also stated that the investigation is almost completed, however, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent and perused the entire materials available on record.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and also
considering the fact that the investigation is almost completed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
7. 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 made ready, before the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethi Mandram, (Fast Track Mahalir Court), Villupuram (FAC) on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each 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 stands 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 on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a
period of four weeks and thereafter, 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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC. 06.01.2023 ham
T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.
ham 06.01.2023