Vengi Udaiyar v. State Rep By
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 447, 427, 379 of IPC r/w Section 3(1) of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 in Crime No.74 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant Joy who is the Village Administrative Officer is that the accused trespassed into the Government land and caused damaged to the barbed wire fencing worth about Rs. 2 lakhs. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and a false case has been given on account of dispute pending between the parties. He further submit that the first petitioner is aged about 70 years and the second petitioner is mentally challenged person and the third petitioner is visually challenged person and a false complaint has
been given against them. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that the petitioners were trespassed into the Government land and caused damage to the wire fencing to the tune of Rs.2 lakhs. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5.Heard the learned counsel on either sides and perused the entire materials available on record including the disability certificate produced in the typed set.
6.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made on both 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 Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tiruvannamalai, on condition that the petitioners 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 everyday 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
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA. J.
drl 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.
17.04.2023 drl