Kumar v. State Rep.By

Crl.O.P.No.21292 of 2024 P.DHANABAL, J.

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Section 281, 125(a) and subsequently @ Sections 281, 125(a), 106(2) of BNS in Crime No.288 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner driven the two wheeler with rash and negligence manner and hit on the father of the defacto complainant. The defacto complainant's father sustained grievous injuries in his head and all over the bodies. After 10 days of treatment, the father of the defacto complainant has expired. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and the petitioner never ride the vehicle in rash and negligence manner at the time of occurrence, the deceased suddenly moved from service road to highways. Therefore, the petitioner was not able to control the vehicle then he hit the deceased for which both are sustained grievous injury. However, on instructions, the learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by 1/5

any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that because of the rash and negligence driving of the petitioner, the father of the defacto complainant sustained grievous injuries in his head and all over the bodies and after 10 days of treatment, the father of the defacto complainant has expired and there is no previous case as against the petitioner and further, considering the gravity of offence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.

Considering the representations made by both sides and considering the nature of offences charged against the petitioner and considering that the petitioner also got injured and that there is no previous case is pending against the petitioner, 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/her appearance, within a period of fifteen

(15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the 2/5

Judicial Magistrate No. I, Krishnagiri 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 and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily until further orders.

[b] the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts of the Court or to any police officer.

[c] the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioner shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. 3/5

[f] 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] If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

03.09.2024 nsl P.DHANABAL, J.

nsl 4/5

03.09.2024 5/5