Vijaya v. 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. Vijaya, W/o.Kamaraj
2. Vicky @ Vignesh, S/o. Kamaraj
3. Mariyammal, W/o. Ranganathan All are residing at, Mariyamman koil street Sathanoor Village Arungunam post, Madhranthagam Taluk Chengalpattu District.
...Petitioners
-Vs State rep by;
Inspector of Police, Maduranthagam Police Station, Chengalpattu District.
Crime No.1287 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.1287 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.V.Bhagiradhan 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 294(b), 323, 324 & 506(ii) of I.P.C read with 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.1287/2020, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners used filthy language against the defacto complainant and her family and also attacked the defacto complainant and her son with deadly weapons during the wordy quarrel between them. Hence the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the the petitioners are innocent and nothing to do with the alleged offence 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 injury and the defacto complainant has been
discharged from the hospital 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 and the fact that the injured discharged from the hospital, 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, Maduranthagam, 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 absconds, 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, Maduranthagam.
2. Inspector of Police Maduranthagam Police Station, Chengalpattu District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J bga Crl.O.P.No. 9474 Of 2020 26.06.2020