P.Anandan v. State Rep By

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 420, 468, 294(b) and 506(i) of IPC in Crime No.22 of 2016, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused created forged documents and sold a property to the defacto complainant. When the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioner and other accused abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and also threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the Intervener would submit that with the help of the wife of the petitioner, who is a Village Panchayat President and along with other accused created forged documents and sold a park land to the defacto complainant. He further submitted that there are totally 11 victims who were cheated by the accused persons. Hence, he opposed grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that there are totally 9 accused in which the petitioner is arrayed as A8. The petitioner along with other accused created forged DTCP approval and sold the property to the defacto complainant, thereby cheated him. Hence, he vehemently opposed grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the above fact and circumstances of the case, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required in this case. Hence, 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 is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate At Arakkonam, Vellore District (presently Ranipet 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 report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[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].

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

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

03.08.2022 mn Crl.O.P.No.17863 of 2022