Sekar J Manoharan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 409, 420 and 120-B IPC in Crime No. 186 of 2022, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners, who were the Office Bearers of the Hockey Unit of Tamil Nadu by abusing their position have swindled a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- belonging to the association. Hence, the case.
3. Mr.S.Siva Sankar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.22049 of 2022 would submit that the petitioner is arrayed as A2. She is an erstwhile General Secretary of the Hockey Unit of Tamil Nadu and she is a reputed State level hockey player and she is presently retired. He would further submit that the petitioner has also filed a Suit against the first accused. As such, due to the dispute regarding management, the petitioner has been unnecessarily dragged in this issue. He would further submit that even as per the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant that the petitioner has been coerced by the
other accused to sign the cheques. However, on instructions, he would furthermore submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- to the credit of the Hockey Unit of Tamil Nadu.
4. M/s.G.Selvi George, learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.21992 of 2022 would submit that the petitioners are arrayed as A1, A3 and A4. They are Office Bearers of the Hockey Unit of Tamil Nadu and they have been putting up their service for the benefit of the hockey players. There is an election dispute pending between the parties, thereby a false complaint has been lodged against them. She would further submit that civil suits are pending with regard to the managing affairs of the hockey association and only due to dispute in the managing affairs of the association, a false complaint has been lodged by the defacto complainant. She would further submit that the money has been spent only for the benefit and welfare of the hockey players. However, without prejudice to the contention, the petitioners are ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- each to the credit of the Hockey Unit of Tamil Nadu.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that petitioners are the Office Bearers of the Hockey Unit of Tamil Nadu and they, by abusing their position have swindled a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- belong to the association. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
6.Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Twenty Five Thousand Only) each, to the credit of the Hockey Unit of Tamil Nadu and on such payment and production of acknowledgment, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of three weeks from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for CCB & CBCID Cases, Egmore, Chennai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 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 for interrogation.
[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 1st petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the 1st 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.
13.09.2022 Anu
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
Anu Crl.O.P.Nos.21992 & 22049 of 2022 13.09.2022