Sujai v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Seventh day of February Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice R. PONGIAPPAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.2782 of 2022 SUJAI [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNARGUDI TOWN POLICE STATION, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT (CRIME NO.57/2022) For Petitioner : M/S.SWAMI SUBRAMANIAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.S.SANTHOSH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under sections 8 and 9 of Tamil Nadu Gaming Act 1930 @ Sections 8 and 9 of Tamil Nadu Gaming Act 1930 and in Section 147, 353 and 506(ii) of IPC., in Crime No.57 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner herein is the owner of the lodge. On 30.01.2022, based on a secret information, when the respondent police conducted a search in the lodge of the petitioner, and the other one accused was found playing Cards with the permission of the petitioner. Hence the complaint. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any such offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police raised objection stating that there totally 10 accused involved in this case and there is no previous case pending against this petitioner and also submitted that investigation almost completed. However, he opposed grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for either side and also considering the fact that investigation is almost completed, custodial interrogation may not be necessary for completing the investigation, hence this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Judicial Magistrate I, Mannargudi, Thiruvarur District on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.

(b) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

(c)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(d)the petitioner 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 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]; and;

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

-sd/- 07/02/2022 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.I, MANNARGUDI, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THIRUVARUR DISTRICT. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNARGUDI TOWN POLICE STATION, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT.

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.SWAMI SUBRAMANIAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.2782/2022 Date :07/02/2022 RW 15/02/2022