Dhamu @ Dhamodharan v. The State Rep By Its,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 26.06.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

1. Dhamu @ Dhamodaran S/o. Arul 760, Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, 3rd Street Melakottaiyur Kancheepuram District 600 127 2.Vicky @ Vignesh S/o. Loganathan 17, Venkatasami street Srinivasa Nagar, Peerkankaranai Kancheepuram District 600 063

...Petitioners

Vs.

State rep. by The Inspector of Police Peerkankaranai Police Station Chennai Crime. No.884 of 2020 ... Respondent Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.884 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : M/s.S.Sivaranjani and M. Arun Kumar For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.884 of 2020 seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioners and the defacto complainant during which the petitioners attacked the defacto complainant and he sustained simple injuries. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the case has been falsely foisted against the petitioners and they not even present in the scene of occurrence. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioners attacked the defacto complainant during the wordy quarrel between them and caused simple injury and there is no previous case against the petitioners. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

6. 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 Judicial Magistrate-I, Thambaram, on condition that each of the petitioners 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 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 daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[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.

26.06.2020 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking order bga To

1. The Judicial Magistrate-I, Thambaram.

2. Inspector of Police Peerkankaranai Police Station Chennai

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

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J bga Crl.O.P.No. 9466 Of 2020 26.06.2020