Arunachalam @ Annachi v. Inspector Of Police
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 384 and 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.151 of 2023, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution as per the de facto complainant A.Manivannan is that he is working as a Cinema Fighter. On 19.03.2023 at about 10.30 a.m., when the de-facto complainant went to Annai Sivagami Nagar to attend a function and at that time, the petitioner has waylaid the de-facto complainant and demanded money (mamool) from him. When the de-facto complainant has refused the same, the petitioner has abused him with filthy language and has snatched his mobile phone. Hence the complaint.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is
ready and willing to furnish solvent sureties and to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed on him. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender, against whom, there are four previous cases similar in nature, which have been registered under Section 75 of the City Police Act, 1888. He further submitted that the petitioner has waylaid the defacto complainant and demanded mamool from him. When the defacto complainant has refused the same, the petitioner has abused him with filthy language and has snatched his mobile phone. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the entire 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 petitioner with 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 on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvottriyur, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a 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 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.
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police every day at 7.30 p.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 229A IPC.
05.04.2023 arb A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
arb 05.04.2023