Rajesh v. The State Rep By Its,

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 457 and 380 of IPC, in Crime No.197 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant/Sathish is that he is the Manager in JP Enterprises Yard, Chitherimedu Village and that more than 70 vehicles seized by several banks were kept in the yard along with one JCB vehicle bearing registration No.AP 21 BS 5826, seized on 10.03.2023 at Alapakkam, by the Manapuram Finance for non payment of dues. On 26.03.2023, the above said JCB was stolen from the yard and hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and a false complaint has been given against them. He would further submit that the petitioners purchased the JCB by

borrowing money from Manapuram Finance and that since the Manapuram Finance had seized the vehicle, the petitioners paid a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to the Financier, and the vehicle was returned to him. Now a false case has been given and hence he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioners stole the JCB from the defacto complainant's yard. Hence, he opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, 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, Kancheepuram, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two sureties 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 daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter everyday Saturday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[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 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;

[f] if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

24.04.2023 jas

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA. J.

jas 24.04.2023