V.Karthik v. State Rep By

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 363-A of IPC, in Crime No.329 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant's wife, namely, Geetha left for work but did not return the home and the defacto complainant went in search of her to all her relatives home but all were in vain, further on enquiry, the defacto complainant came to know that his wife Geetha was interested with the petitioner, who worked with her. Hence, the defacto complainant lodged the complaint against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court by order dated 25.08.2015 granted interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner on certain conditions.

4. In view of the above submission, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner in Crl.OP.No.20166 of 2015 dated 25.08.2015 is 1/3

made absolute on the following conditions;

[a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of three weeks.

[b] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[d] 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 have been imposed and the petitioner 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].

[e] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

07.07.2022 drl 2/3

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

drl Crl.O.P.No.20166 of 2015 07.07.2022 3/3