Subash @ Subhakirudhu v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Sixteenth day of February Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice R. PONGIAPPAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.3597 of 2022 SUBASH @ SUBHAKIRUDHU [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, S7, MADIPAKKAM POLICE STATION, CHENNAI CRIME NO.47 OF 2022 For Petitioner : M/S M.RAJAVELU 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 447, 427 and 506(i) of IPC in Crime No.47 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused damaged the name board which was erected by the defatco complainant in his land and when the same was questioned by the defatco complainant, the petitioner threatened him with dire consequences and also abused the him with filthy language. Hence the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any such offences as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is the first offender, and the other accused in this case are already enlarged on bail. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police by filing counter raised objection stating that investigation is pending. However, he would admit that the petitioner is the first offender.

5. 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. 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 learned Judicial Magistrate II, Alandur, Chennai, 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., for a period of thirty (30) days and thereafter, as and when required for investigation.

(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/- 16/02/2022 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.II, ALANDUR, CHENNAI.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE CHENGALPATTU. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, S7, MADIPAKKAM POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1 CC to M/S M.RAJAVELU Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.2403 CRL OP.3597/2022 Date :16/02/2022 RW 18/02/2022