Backiyaraj 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.1520 of 2022 1.Backiyaraj 2.Anbazhagi 3.Kamalavathi 4.Suguna ... Petitioners Vs.

The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Nannilam Police Station, Tiruvarur District.

(Crime No.34 of 2022) ... Respondent/complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioners on Anticipatory Bail in the event of their arrest in Cr.No.34 of 2022 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Padmanabhan For Respondent : Mr. A.Gokulakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 355 and 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.34 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there was a previous enemity between the petitioner and the defacto complainant, due to which, the petitioners have attacked and abused him in a filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent persons and they were no way connected in this case and they have not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution and he further submitted that there was a case in counter. He pray for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor raised objection stating that there was a previous enemity between them and the petitioners have assaulted and abused the defacto complainant in filthy languages and that there is a case in counter and he further submitted that the investigation was almost completed.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions made by the both counsel a also the fact that the investigation was almost completed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner 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 (15) days after lifting of lockdown or the commencement of the Court's normal functioning whichever is earlier, before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Nannilam, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.

[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 has been imposed and the petitioners are 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 DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NANNILAM.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUVARUR [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NANNILAM POLICE STATION, TIRUVARUR DISTRICT.

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1 CC to M/S. D.PADMANABHAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.1250 CRL OP.1520/2022 Date :25/01/2022 JPA 09/02/2022