Nandhagopal T.L v. Inspector Of Police
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 354 A, 506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Harassment of Womens Act, 1998, in Crime No.08 of 2023 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the Chairman of the Trust. The defacto complainant was working under him. The petitioner had misbehaved with the defacto complainant on several occasions and when she had questioned him, he had threatened her stating that he would give a false complaint against her as if she had stolen money from the Trust. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and a false complaint has been registered against him. He would further submitted that the petitioner is running a
Trust and the defacto complainant was working in the Trust. During the course of employment, the defacto complainant swindled money and when it was questioned by the petitioner, he has give a false complaint against the petitioner. Hence, he would prays for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner is the Chairman of the Trust and she was working under him. The petitioner had misbehaved with her on several occasions and when she had questioned him he had threatened her stating that he would given a false complaint against her as if she had stolen money from the Trust. He would also submit that the delay in the lodging the complaint would show that it is a motivated complaint. However, he vehemently opposed to the grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on records.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Additional Mahila Court, Thiruvallur, 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 stay at Chidambaram and report before the Chidambaram Town Police Station everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[d] the petitioner 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 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].
[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
08.06.2023 jas
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
jas 08.06.2023