Pagalavan v. The State Rep By Its,
Crl.O.P.No.20355 of 2024 P.DHANABAL, J.
The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 341, 294 (b), 323, 385, 506 91),379 and 511 of I.P.C in Crime No.394 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.
The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant is working as a Junior Assistant in the BDO Office, Kadathur and while he was returning from office, he was stopped by the accused persons and he was asked about his caste, he was assaulted by them and they snatched his money. Hence, the complaint.
3.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had not committed any offence as alleged and the petitioners had been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to furnish substantial sureties for their due release and abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court and therefore, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4.
The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the de facto complainant while returning from his office was stopped by the accused persons and they enquired about his caste and assaulted him and also snatched his money. He further stated that there is one previous case as against the petitioners and also considering the gravity of offence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5.
Considering the representations made by both sides and considering that the injured was discharged from hospital and taking into consideration of the fact that though the petitioners have one previous case, it is not similar in nature and also the first and the second accused were released on bail and also considering the nature of offences charged against the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
6.
Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the Learned Judicial Magistrate Harur, on condition that the petitioners shall execute
a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (each) (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 petitioners shall report before the respondent police on every day, for thirty days (30).
[b] the petitioners 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 petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] the petitioners shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. [f] 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].
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
23.08.2024 vca P.DHANABAL, J.
vca Crl.O.P.No.20355 of 2024 23.08.2024