Abdulkarim v. The State Rep By,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.11.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.15859 of 2020 1.Abdul Karim ... Petitioners 2.Chithik Khan Vs.
The State Represented by,
...Respondent
The Inspector of Police, Thirupathur Town Police Station, Vellore District.
(Cr.No.1437 of 2020) Prayer:
Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Connection with the Crime No.1437 of 2020 pending on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.Vinoth For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
(This case has been heard through video conference) The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 336, 337 & 304 of IPC, in Crime No.1437 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant viz., Amudha is that her husband along with other persons were engaged in construction work in a Mosque and when they were lifting the steel rods, one of the steel rods had touched the electric line on account of which her husband and his colleague died by electrocution and another person sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the
petitioners are the trustees of the Mosque. The petitioners have handed over the construction work to the contractor and his duty is to take care of safety measures whereas the contractor has failed to do, as a result of which two persons died and one person sustained injuries. He would further submit that the victims are not direct employees of the Mosque. But the petitioners, being the trustees of the Mosque, paid an amount of Rs.1,75,000/- to the legal heirs of the victim as compensation and they have also paid the compensation to the injured person. They have also filed the proof of the same. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioners are the trustees of the Mosque. During construction work, the victims died by electrocution and one employee sustained injuries. Hence, he vehemently opposed the 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 ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the copy of the order is made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate - I, Thirupathur, on condition that each of the petitioner shall execute a separate 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 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 as and when required.
[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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
7.With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.
-sd/- 05/11/2020 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, THIRUPATHUR.
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VELLORE. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUPATHUR TOWN POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISRICT.
4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
+1 CC to M/S.M.VINOTH Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.7410 CRL OP.15859/2020 Date :05/11/2020 TA-19/11/2020