Kavitha @ Kamala v. Police Department

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN.

J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(i) IPC r/w 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 in Crime No.459 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, petitioner is falsely implicated in this case in Crime No.459 of 2023 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(i) IPC r/w 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in connection with vacating the house taken on lease by the defacto complainant. Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent, this petition is filed.

3. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal side), opposes this petition, on the ground that, defacto complainant had taken on lease, the house of Ranjith and paid Rs.50,000/- as advance. The accused insisted the defacto complainant to vacate the house. On 23.06.2023 at about 11.00

a.m., when defacto complainant was preparing for vacating the house, accused came there, abused her and accused Ranjith hit her with iron rod on the back of her head. As a result, she suffered injuries. He further submitted that, injured had been treated and discharged from the hospital. Thus, he prayed for dismissal of this petition.

4. Considering the nature of the allegations made in the first information report, and that it was A1, who hit defacto complainant with iron rod, and there is nothing said about the role of A2, at the time of the attack and that injured had been discharged from the hospital and that the material part of the investigation might have been over by this time, this Court is of the view that, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary and 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 -I, Poonamalle on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five 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 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].

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN.

J.

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

13.07.2023 gd