Ragu @ Raghu v. State Rep By Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.07.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.10507 of 2020 1.Ragu @ Raghu 2.Ramamoorthy 3.Kumaran @ Kumaravel 4.Abrakhan @ Abirakam 5.Vijay 6.Ajay 7.Sasi @ Sasikumar ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.3,4,6 to 10 Vs.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Panamadangi Police Station, Vellore District.

... Respondent/Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.223 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.E.Kannadasan For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(ii) and 307 of IPC in Crime No.223 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. The case of the prosecution is that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioners and the defacto complainant and the petitioners have assaulted the defacto complainant with hand, Knife, blade and iron rod, due to which, the victim has sustained head injury. Hence, the complaint.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners and the defacto complainant are known to each other and during the quarrel this incident was happened. He would submit that the injured has also been discharged from the hospital. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioners/accused persons and defacto complainant are known to each other. On 24.05.2020, there was a quarrel between the petitioners and the defacto complainant during consuming liquor and at that time, the petitioners have assaulted the defacto complainant with hands, iron rod and wooden log. He would submit that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. He would further submit that there is no previous case against the petitioners. However, he oppose to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

Taking into consideration the facts and submissions of the learned counsel and the fact that the victim has been discharged from the hospital, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions; Accordingly, the petitioners are directed 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, Katpadi, on condition that the each petitioner 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 every day at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter report before the respondent police every Monday 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.

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

-sd/- 14/07/2020 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KATPADI 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANAMADANGI POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT CC to M/S. E.KANNADASAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.10507/2020 Date :14/07/2020 RVR 03/09/2020