Murugan @ Vettrilai Muragan v. The State Rep. By

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b) and 506(i) IPC r/w Section 4 of TN Prohibition of Charges Exorbitant Interest Act, 2003, in Crime No.305 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant pledged his vehicle and borrowed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- at 6% interest. On 25.05.2018, the defacto complainant repaid the entire amount with interest and received his vehicle. While receiving the vehicle, the defacto complainant noticed that his car tyres and some of the parts were damaged by the petitioner which was questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioner assured him to repair his car after some time. Thereafter, the petitioner delayed to repair the vehicle and demanded exorbitant interest and threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was not at all involved in the above said crime and he has no way connected with the alleged offence made by the prosecution. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner demanded exorbitant interest to the defacto complainant and also threatened him with dire consequences. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

6. 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 Judicial Magistrate, Sirkazhi, Myladuthurai 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 two 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].

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

03.08.2022 ata

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

ata 03.08.2022