Guruprasanth v. State Rep.By, Its, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17-02-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN CRL OP NO. 3966 of 2025 Guruprasanth S/o. Suresh, No.36-1, Thiruvengada Nagar, Maniyanur, Salem District. Cr.No.3 of 2025.

Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep.By, Its, The Inspector Of Police, Kondalampatty Police Station, Salem District. (Crime No.3 of 2025) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):

T Shanmugam For Respondent : Mr.S.Balaji, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 303(2) of BNS in Crime No.3 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. Page No.1 of 5

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused had committed the theft of 56 iron centering sheets worth Rs.43,000/-. Hence, the case.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the property have been seized and that the custodial interrogation is not required in this case and hence prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), per contra, would submit that the property was recovered; and that the petitioner has one previous case pending against him.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the fact that the property was recovered, the petitioner is released on bail in an earlier case, and since the custodial Page No.2 of 5

interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner on 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 Judicial Magistrate No.5, Salem, on condition that each petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further conditions that: [a] the petitioner and 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. [c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. Page No.3 of 5

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [f] 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].

[g] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

17.02.2025 drl To

1. The Inspector Of Police, Kondalampatty Police Station, Salem District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.

Page No.4 of 5

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

drl 17.02.2025 Page No.5 of 5