N.Satis Kumar v. The State Rep.By Its

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 09.03.2021 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN Crl.O.P.No.4278 of 2021 N.Sathis Kumar ... Petitioner Vs.

State Rep. by:- ... Respondent The Inspector of Police, K-9, Thiruvika Nagar Police Station, Chennai-82.

(Crime No.809 of 2020) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.809 of 2020 on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Balamurugan For Respondent : Mr.K.Prabakar, Addl. Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(The case has been heard through video conference) Totally, there are 15 accused and the petitioner is arrayed as A14. The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 323, 324, 448, 427, 336, and 307 of I.P.C. in Crime No.809 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, and now, he has filed this petition seeking to grant anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to a civil dispute between the defacto complainant and A1, there was a wordy quarrel, out of which, all the accused said to have attacked the defacto complainant, thereby caused injury to him. Hence, the criminal case has been registered against the petitioner. Now, apprehending arrest, the present petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the occurrence was taken place due to a wordy quarrel between the parties and there is no specific overtact attributed against the petitioner. He would submit that he is an innocent person and he is no way connected with the offence. He would also submit that the

other accused were arrested and they were released on bail. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that due to a civil dispute and previous enmity, all the accused have attacked the defacto complainant, and caused injury to him. He would submit that now the injured was discharged from the hospital and the co-accused were arrested and released on bail. He would submit that there is no bad antecedents pending against the petitioner. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration of the fact that the occurrence was taken place due to a wordy quarrel between the parties, the injured was discharged from the hospital, and there is no bad antecedents against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, 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 learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.

[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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

6. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.

-sd/- 09/03/2021 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 V METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE.

2 THE CHEIF METRTOPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE[FOR INFORMATION].

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, K-9, THIRUVIKA NAGAR POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

+2 CC to M/S. B.BALAMURUGAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR NO. 3018 CRL OP.4278/2021 Date :09/03/2021 MN-15/03/2021