← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/3479/2022granted

Selvam @ Neppolian v. State Rep. By

2022-02-14Honourable Mr Justice R. Pongiappan3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Fourteenth day of February Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice R. PONGIAPPAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.3479 of 2022 SELVAM @ NEPPOLIAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP. BY [ RESPONDENT ] INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KITCHIPALAYAM POLICE STATION, SALEM CITY, CRIME NO.609 OF 2019.

For Petitioner : M/S.A.V.ARUN Advocate For Respondent : MR.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 342, 387, 392, 420 & 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.609 of 2019, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused persons threatened the defacto complainant by showing knife and also robbed the defacto complainant's car, ATM card and other materials. Hence the present case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner is the first offender, and during the time of enquiry, from the first accused, the property which was stolen away in the alleged occurrence has been recovered. According to him, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary 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 the investigation is pending. However he fairly admits that the property which was stolen during the time of alleged occurrence was recovered.

5. The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either sides are considered.

6. The respondent Police registered a case as against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 342, 387, 392, 420 & 506 (ii) of IPC. The main accused who is arrayed as first accused in this case was secured and released on bail. The property, which was stolen away in this case, has also been recovered.

6. Taking note of all the above said aspects into consideration and having regard to the nature of the offence committed by the petitioner, this Court came to the conclusion that for the completion of investigation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary in this case. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7. 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 learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five 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 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;

(b) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.00 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/- 14/02/2022 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 PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE SALEM.

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KITCHIPALAYAM POLICE STATION, SALEM CITY, 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1 CC to M/S.A.V.ARUN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.2314 CRL OP.3479/2022 Date :14/02/2022 JPA 18/02/2022