Muruganantham v. The State Represented By The Inspector Of Police
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 294(b), 427 and 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.354 of 2022, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution as per the de facto complainant B.Ravikiran, is that on 27.04.2022 at about 9.30 a.m., the petitioners/accused trespassed into the de facto complainant's land on account of property dispute and the petitioners/accused had abused the de facto complainant with filthy language and also criminally intimidated him with Aruval. Hence the complaint.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioners
are ready and willing to furnish solvent sureties and abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed on them. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that due to previous enmity with regard to property dispute between the de facto complainant and the petitioners, the petitioners had abused the de facto complainant with filthy language and also also criminally intimidated him with Aruval. Therefore, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the FIR.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions of either sides, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Valangaiman, on condition that each of the petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five 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 condition that: [a] the petitioners 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. [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police every day at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.
[c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d] the petitioners 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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
23.03.2023 arb
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
arb 23.03.2023