Irfan v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26.05.2021

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP Crl.O.P.No.9372 of 2021 Irfan ... Petitioner/Accused No.3 Vs.

State represented by The Inspector of Police, Hudco Police Station, Krishnagiri District.

Crime No.119 of 2021.

... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original petition has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C, prayed to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.119 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.E.Kannadasan For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl side)

ORDER

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner who was arrested on 15.04.2021 and remanded to judicial custody for the offences under Sections 364(A), 365, 383 and 387 of I.P.C in Cr.No.119 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 06.04.2021, at 07.00 p.m., the petitioner along with other accused persons kidnapped the defacto complainant for ransom and obtained a sum of Rs.5,93,000/- from his bank account through Google pay. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the petitioner is arrayed as A3 and based on the confession statement of A1, he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. He further submitted that the petitioner is in no way connected with the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that A4 was arrested and enlarged on bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.8547 of 2021 dated 06.05.2021. Therefore, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) vehemently opposed the grant of bail by stating that the petitioner along with other accused persons kidnapped the defacto complainant for ransom and obtained a sum of Rs.5,93,000/- from his bank account through Google pay. He further submitted that during interrogation A1 was arrested and seized the amount of Rs.1,60,000/- and one sovereign gold from him and the confession statement was recorded and the other accused persons are still in judicial custody.

5. Considering the fact that co-accused had already been granted bail by this Court and the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner and also the present COVID-19 pandemic situation, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

(a) the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) before the Jailer of the Sub-Jail, Krishnagiri in which the petitioner is confined and on such execution the petitioner shall be released from prison;

(b) (i) After the lockdown restrictions are raised and normal time is restored, the restrictions are totally raised, the petitioner shall execute a own bond for sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.II, Hosur, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail granted by this Court shall stand dismissed. The same shall be executed within a period of one month from the date the lockdown restrictions are raised.

(ii) If for any reason, the petitioner is not able to execute bond within the specified time, the petitioner shall approach this Court and file a petition seeking extension of time for the same.

(iii) While executing the bond, the sureties shall furnish proof of identity and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate shall obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Votor ID or Driving license or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Hosur.

(c) After the lockdown restrictions are raised, normal time is restored, the petitioner shall abide by the following conditions imposed by this Court. He/she shall not interfere, influence or cause hindrance to the pending investigation.

(d)the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

(e) the petitioner shall not influence, threaten or coerce the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(f)the petitioner shall not abscond 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]; and; (h)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

-sd/- 26/05/2021 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.II, HOSUR.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KRISHNAGIRI [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE JAILER, SUB-JAIL, KRISHNAGIRI.

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HUDCO POLICE STATION, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.E.KANNADASAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.9372/2021 Date :26/05/2021 MK:31/05/2021