Haridass v. The State Rep.By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:25.01.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.O.P.No.1253 of 2022 Haridass .. Petitioner Vs.
The State Rep.by The Sub Inspector of Police, Choolaimedu Police Station, Chennai.
Crime No.688 of 2021.
...Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or his appearance before any Court in connection with the case in Crime No.688 of 2021 which is pending on the file of the respondent Police .
For Petitioner : Mr.Iniyavan for T.Saravanan For Respondent : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan, Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 408, 420, 306 of IPC, in Crime No.688 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused persons had collected a sum of Rs.21,00,000/- from the deceased for the purpose of securing a job. Thereafter, the petitioner along with other accused persons neither secured job nor returned the money, due to which, the deceased had committed suicide by pouring petrol over his body and run outside the road and died. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that co-accused had already been released on bail. He further submitted that the petitioner is the
relative of the deceased and the petitioner's name was not found in the FIR. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner along with other accused persons had collected a sum of Rs.21,00,000/- from the deceased for the purpose of securing a job. Thereafter, the petitioner along with other accused persons neither secured job nor returned money, due to which, the deceased had committed suicide by pouring petrol over his body and ran outside the road and died. He further submitted that investigation is at initial stage. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:
(a). Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days after lifting of lockdown or the commencement of the Court's normal functioning whichever is earlier, before the learned XXII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, on condition that the petitioner 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 and on further condition that:
[a] the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- in the Crime No.688 of 2021, on the file of the learned XXII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore. The wife and two children are directed to withdraw the said amount;
[b] The Chairman/District Judge ,Tamil Nadu Legal Services Authority, Vellore District, is directed to pay Rs.75,000/- each to minor children under victim compensation scheme as per under Section 357(A) of IPC and deposit the same in a fixed deposit, until they attain majority and the mother of the minor children is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest for the welfare of the minor children; [c] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;
[d] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police every Wednesday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for an interrogation;
[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
[e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[f] on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions has been imposed and the petitioner is 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]; and;
[g] if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC;
-sd/- 25/01/2022 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 XXII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE.
2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE CHAIRMAN/ DISTRICT JUDGE, TAMIL NADU LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY, VELLORE DISTRICT.
4 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHOOLAIMEDU POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.
5 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
6 THE SECRETARY TAMIL NADU STATE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY, HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
+1CC to M/S. T.SARAVANAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.No.1210 CRL OP.1253/2022 Date :25/01/2022 CSK 04/02/2022