Sudhagar v. State Rep.By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Seventh day of October Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.18789 of 2021 1 SUDHAGAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] 2 S.KENNADY Vs STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NAMAKKAL POLICE STATION, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT.
CR.NO.1650 OF 2021.
For Petitioner : M/S.B.VASUDEVAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.GOPINATH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 353, 506(i) of IPC r/w. 7(1)(a) Criminal Law Amendment Act 2005 in Cr.No.1650 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused A-1 and the petitioner/A-2 ran a food centre in a push cart and accused A-3 and petitioner/A-4 are assistant of A-1 and A-2. When the law enforcing agency went to patrol, at that time it seems that the petitioners were selling water packets and other food items to the persons who consume alcohol nearby the TASMAC shop and when the same was questioned by the law enforcing agency, there arose wordy quarrel between them. Hence, the law enforcing agency registered a case against the petitioners.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submits that the petitioners were selling water packets and other food items to the persons who consume alcohol nearby the TASMAC shop. When the same was questioned by the law enforcing agency, there arose wordy quarrel between them. Hence, he opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the petitioners are poor coolies, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
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 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Namakkal, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each, 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 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 Court concerned 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.
(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]; and;
(f)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.
-sd/- 07/10/2021 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, NAMAKKAL.
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NAMAKKAL. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NAMAKKAL POLICE STATION, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT.
CC to M/S.B.VASUDEVAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.18789/2021 Date :07/10/2021 TA-27/10/2021