M.Goutham Anand v. The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.05.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM Crl.O.P.No.9509 of 2021 1.M.Goutham 2.Anish Jai ... Petitioners/A1 & A2 Vs.
The Inspector of Police, C-1, Sriperumpudur Police Station, Kancheepuram District.
Cr.No. Not known ... Respondent/Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest pending investigation in connection with Crime No. not known, on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Karunagaran For Respondent : Mr.J.C.Durairaj Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
O R D E R
(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Section 420 of IPC, in Crime No. Not known, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that a false complaint has been given against the petitioners and they have not connected with the crime as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents submitted that there is a dispute between the complainant and the petitioner with regard to money transaction and he would further submitted that the case has been registered in C.S.R.No.508 of 2021 and hence, opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4.This Court considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for all the parties concerned and also perused the material on record. It is found that there was a dispute with regard to money transaction. No case is registered only petition enquiry is pending as against the petitioner.
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 petitioners is not necessary and the fact that there is no apprehension that the petitioners may abscond, the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest or on their appearance, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram, on condition that the petitioners shall execute their own bond for a sum of Rs.
[c] the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;
[d] the petitioners shall appear before the Court below, whenever required.
[e] the petitioners 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 petitioners 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 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].
[h] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
-sd/- 20/05/2021 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, SRIPERUMBADUR, KANCHEEPURAM 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KANCHEEPURAM(FOR INFORMATION) 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE C-1, SRIPERUMPUDUR POLICE STATION, KANCHEEPURAM DISTRICT.
4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S.R.KARUNAGARAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges Sr.6286 CRL OP.9509/2021 Date :20/05/2021 RVR 03/06/2021