Niamathullah v. The Inspector Of Police
T.V.THAMIILSELVI, J., The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 419, 420 of IPC and Section 15(3) of Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and Section 23(1), 25 of Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 in Crime No.198 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is a Joint Director of Medical and Rural Development, Thiruppathur District. On 01.04.2024, based on the secret information, with regard to illegal scan Centre run by A1 and A2 in this case, the defacto complainant inspected their house and found that they were in illegal possession of ultra sound scan machine. Thereafter, upon investigation, it was found that the petitioner also involved in the said offence. Hence the complaint.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to comply with any
stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submits that there are totally 4 accused in this case and that the petitioner is ranked as A4. He further submits that all the accused in this case were charged for running a scan Centre, without permission. He further submits that now the ultra sound machine was seized by the respondent police. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent and perused the entire materials available on record.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the both counsel, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court-I, Tirupattur, on condition that the
petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only), with two sureties, each [Out of which, one surety must be a blood related 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, and on further condition that: [a] the petitioner shall file an affidavit before the Trial Court that not to run the scan centre without permission;
[b] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; [c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, on every Wednesday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three months and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;
[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[f] 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 has been imposed and the petitioner are released on anticipatory 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;
[g] if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC;
21.06.2024 ssi
T.V.THAMIILSELVI, J., ssi 21.06.2024