Rajan @ Rajendran v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Sixth day of June Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.10583 of 2022 RAJAN @ RAJENDRAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUTHANDIKUPPAM POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.217/2022.

For Petitioner : M/S. S.SAIRAMAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.DAMODARAN, Additional Public Prosecutor, PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(2), 307 and 420 of IPC in Crime No.217 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused cheated the defacto complainant that they were ready to sell Irudiam at the rate of Rs.4,00,000/- to him. It is also alleged that the petitioner received a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- and along with other accused persons attacked the defacto complainant with iron rod and abused him with filthy language. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner only introduced the other accused persons to the defacto complainant and he is nothing to do with the crime as alleged by the Prosecution. He would further submit the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that without prejudice to his rights, the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-

(Rupees one lakhs fifty thousand only) to the credit of crime No.217 of 2022. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that totally there are four accused in which, the petitioner is arrayed as A3 and he received a sum of Rs1,50,000/- from the defacto complainant. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances in this case and also considering the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

6.

Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) to the credit of Crime No.217 of 2022, within a period of two weeks from the date on which the order copy made ready, and on such deposit the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Panruti, Cuddalore District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each 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 petitioner 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 petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) to the credit of Crime No.217 of 2022, before the concerned Magistrate, within a period of two weeks from the date on which the order copy made ready.

[c] the final order in respect of the said deposit shall be passed by the learned trial Judge at conclusion of trial. [d] the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with 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]. [h] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

-sd/- 06/06/2022 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.I, PANRUTI, CUDDALORE DISTRICT 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE CUDDALORE. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUTHANDIKUPPAM POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT.

+1 CC to M/S. S.SAIRAMAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.8558 CRL OP.10583/2022 Date :06/06/2022 TA-09/06/2022