Amaran @ Bharathiraja v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.02.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl. O.P. No.3020 of 2025 Amaran @ Bharathiraja S/o. Jeyachandran ... Petitioner Vs.
The State represented by:
The Inspector of Police, Perumanallur Police Station, Tiruppur District.
(Crime No.559 of 2024).
... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in connection with the Crime No.559 of 2024, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.K. Gopinath For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.11.2024, seeking bail in Crime No.559 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 331(3), 305(a), and 317(2) of BNS.
1/5
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused have committed theft over the valuables worth about Rs.27,000/- from the house of the defacto complainant.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as A1 in this case; that he is not involved in the offences as alleged by the prosecution; and that the co-accused A2 and A4 were already granted bail. He further submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 21.11.2024 and he is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.
4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing for grant of bail to the petitioner, submitted that the the petitioner, along with other accused, has committed theft of properties worth about Rs.27,000/- and the properties were recovered. He further submitted that, apart from this case, petitioner has 6 previous cases. 2/5
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the nature of allegations, period of incarceration, properties have been recovered, that the petitioner is in bail in all other previous cases and that since further custody is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tiruppur and on further conditions that: [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate 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, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
3/5
[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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];
[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
07.02.2025 mjs To
1. The Judicial Magistrate, Tiruppur.
2. The Inspector of Police, Perumanallur Police Station, Tiruppur District. .
3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
4/5
SUNDER MOHAN., J.
mjs 07.02.2025 5/5