Perumal v. State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19.05.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM Crl.O.P.No.9356 of 2021 Perumal ... Petitioner Vs.

State by The Inspector of Police, Dusi Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District, Crime No.174 of 2021.

... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest concerned in Crime No.174 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police on such terms and conditions. For petitioner : Mr.A.Saranraj For Respondent : Mr.J.C.Durai Raj, GA (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 379, 430 of I.P.C., r/w Section 21(5) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, in Crime No.174 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the false complaint has been given against the petitioner and he has not connected with the crime as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the petitioner was found in possession of quarter unit of Sand. He would also submit that no previous case is pending against the petitioner.

4. This Court considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for all the parties concerned and perused the FIR. 5.The Supreme Court has laid down the law regarding grant of anticipatory bail in the case of Gurbaksh Singh Vs. State (AIR 1980 SC 1632) and considering the fact that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary and the fact that there is no apprehension that the petitioner may abscond, the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvannamalai District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute own bond for a sum of Rs.

[c] the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

[d] the petitioner shall appear before the Court below, whenever required.

[e] the petitioner shall affix his photograph and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of his Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure his/her identity. [f] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[g] 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 himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

[h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

-sd/- 19/05/2021 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 PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DUSI POLICE STATION, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.

+1 CC to M/S.A.SARANRAJ Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.No.6248 CRL OP.9356/2021 Date :19/05/2021 cs 16/06/2021