G.Gunasekar v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN G.Gunasekar
...Petitioner/Accused
Vs.
State rep by The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Salem, Salem District.
(Crime No.2/AC/2025) ...
Respondent PRAYER: This criminal original petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.2/AC/2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :
Mr.E.Kannadasan For Respondent :
Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Page No.1 of 6
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.03.2025, seeking bail in Crime No.2/AC/2025 registered for the offence under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended in 2018. 2.It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner, who was working as a Bill Collector had demanded Rs.40,000/- from the defacto complainant as a bribe for water and house tax assessment name transfer in the name of the defacto complainant's son, who purchased the house located at Therku Puthumariamman Koil Street, Narasingapuram, Attur; that after repeated request of the defacto complainant, the petitioner had reduced his demand to Rs.25,000/- and received the same; and that a trap was conducted and the petitioner was arrested. Hence, the case. Page No.2 of 6
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations are false and in any case, considering the period of incarceration, further custody of the petitioner is not required and sought for bail. 4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner was arrested during trap proceedings.
5.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6.Considering the aforesaid facts, the nature of allegations, period of incarceration, this Court is of the view that further custody of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. Page No.3 of 6
7.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Special Court for the Trial of Cases under Prevention of Corruption Act, Salem, Salem District, and on further conditions that: [a] 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 everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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 Page No.4 of 6
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 269 B.N.S.
25.03.2025 ata Copy to:
1.The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Salem, Salem District.
2.The Special Court for the Trial of Cases under Prevention of Corruption Act, Salem, Salem District.
3.Central Prison, Salem.
4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
Page No.5 of 6
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
ata 25.03.2025 Page No.6 of 6