Sundarrajan v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 13.08.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.OP.No.12104 of 2020

1. Sundarrajan

2. Rajesh

3. Indhira

4. Parvathi ... Petitioners Vs.

State rep by The Inspector of Police, Manalmedu police station, Nagapattinam District.

Crime No.984 of 2020 ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.984 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.V.Sakkarapani For Respondent : Mr.K.Prabakar, Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(This case has been heard through video conference) The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences publishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 342, 452, 324, 307 & 379 IPC, in Crime No.984 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant Elayaraja is that the accused due to previous enmity caused damages to the trees in the backside of his house and when it was questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioners assaulted the defacto complainant with knife and his family members with deadly weapons and they have also snatched the gold chain of the defacto complainant's wife. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and that due to previous enmity a false case has been foisted against the petitioners. He would submit that the very reading of the FIR would show that the case is a fabricated one. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners and the defacto complainant were neighbours and that the petitioners have caused damages to the trees in the backside of the house of the defacto complainant and when the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, they assaulted them and also snatched the four soverign Gold chain of the wife of the defacto complainant. Therefore, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and submissions of the learned Counsel, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions;

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days after lifting of lockdown or the commencement of the Court's normal functioning whichever is earlier, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Mayiladuthurai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two surety, 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 first and second petitioners shall report before the respondent daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter every Monday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. The third and fourth petitioners shall report before the respondent daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of one week and thereafter as and when required 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].

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

7.With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.

-sd/- 13/08/2020 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, MAYILADUTHURAI.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NAGAPATTINAM [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANALMEDU POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.V.SAKKARAPANI Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.12104/2020 Date :13/08/2020 MK:26/08/2020