Palanivel v. The State Represented By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 18-02-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN PALANIVEL Son of Mr. Kannan, No. 9, East Street, Ulundandar Koil Village, Ulundurpet Taluk, Kallakurichi District Petitioner(s) Vs The state represented by, The Inspector of Police, Oomangalam Police Station, Cuddalore District (Crime No. 228 of 2024) Respondent(s) Prayer:

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to enlarge the petitioner / Accused on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No. 228 of 2024 pending on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr. Magesh Kumar For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Balaji, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 303(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No. 228 of 2024, on the file of the respondent 1/4

police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with the other accused had committed the theft of iron pipes worth Rs.80,000/-. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent; that he has been falsely implicated in this case; that the co-accused was arrested and released on bail; that based on the confession statement of the co-accused, the petitioner was implicated in this case and in any case custodial interogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation and hence, he prayed for anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that the stolen property was recovered and that there are two previous cases as against the petitioner and hence, opposed for grant of anticipatory bail.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and also perused the 2/4

materials available on record.

6.

Considering the submissions made on either side; nature of allegation; that the property was recovered; that only based on the confession statement of other co-accused, the petitioner was implicated in this case; that the co-accused was arrested and released on bail; that the petitioner is released on bail in other previous cases and since custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: (a) 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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Neyveli at Cuddalore District on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

vca [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police every day at 3/4

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];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

18.02.2025 vca To To The state represented by, The Inspector of Police, Oomangalam Police Station, Cuddalore District (Crime No. 228 of 2024) 4/4