Elumalai v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Tenth day of February Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice R. PONGIAPPAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.3220 of 2022 1 ELUMALAI [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 MURUGAN @ BALAMURUGAN Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGAM POLICE STATION, TIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.

CR.NO.20/2022.

For Petitioner : M/S.S.PANNEER SELVAM Advocate For Respondent : MR.S.SANTHOSH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL 438 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 324 and 307 of IPC. in Crime No.20 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners and the defacto complainant are neighbours. It is alleged that there was a wordy quarrel in between them with regard to cutting of Guava tree, which belongs to the defacto complainant. Subsequently, the petitioners assaulted the defacto complainant and his father with wooden log. Hence the complaint was registered by the Law Enforcing Agency.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any such offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is his specific submission that the person who sustained injury in the alleged occurrence is now discharged from the hospital. Accordingly, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the investigation is pending. However, he admits that the petitioners and the defacto complainant are the neighbours and as of now, the injured was discharged from the hospital. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. The submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side are considered. This case has been registered against these petitioners and two others for the offenses punishable under the Sections 294(b), 324 and 307 of IPC. The Accused 1 and 3 are already released on bail by this Court. Though there was a clear overt act is against these petitioners, considering the fact that the persons, who sustained injury are discharged from the hospital, custodial interrogation may not be necessary for completing the investigation.

6.Taking all the above aspects into consideration, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 7.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Chengam on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each, 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 petitioners 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 petitioners shall report before the Palani Town Police Station daily at 10.00 a.m., until further orders.

(c)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d)the petitioners 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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the

petitioners 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/- 10/02/2022 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, CHENGAM, TIRUVANNAMALAI.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUVANNAMALAI. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

4 THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGAM POLICE STATION, TIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.

5 THE OFFICER INCHARGE PALANI TOWN POLICE STATION, DINDUGAL DISTRICT.

+1 CC to M/S.S.PANNEER SELVAM Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.2232 CRL OP.3220/2022 Date :10/02/2022 TA-16/02/2022