Venkatesan v. The State Rep.By

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 463, 465, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC in Crime No.10 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that petitioner was working as Tahsildar in SIDCO. He had contacted the de-facto complainant and had assured him that he will give employment as Office Assistant in various Departments of the Government. Believing the words of the de-facto complainant and other accused, the de-facto complainant had paid a sum of Rs.78,74,000/- in total to all the accused and also had handed over the copies of their mark certificate, Aadhaar Card and Service records to them. After that, the accused had also given employment orders to some of the persons. However, when they went for joining in the office, they came to understand that those appointment orders are fake. As the accused had failed to secure the job nor return the money, the

complaint has been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has nothing to do with the said incident and respondent police has filed a case for statistical purpose and falsely foisted the case against the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner is a retired Tahsildar and no way connected with the offence and the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions imposed by this Court and prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Per contra, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that the petitioner/accused was working as a Tahsildar at Hosur SIDCO, Krishnagiri District from the year 2017 to 2019. At that time, petitioner along with A1, A2 and A4 had lured the public by stating that they would secure job in Government and illegally collected a sum of Rs.78,74,000/- from 26 persons. The said amount is yet to be recovered and some more accused yet to be secured. Hence, he prays for dismissal of this petition.

5. Heard both sides and perused the records.

6. Admittedly, the occurrence is of the year 2017 and FIR has been registered only in the year 2022.

7. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case and the age of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

8. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs only) to the credit of Crime No.10 of 2022, within a period of two weeks from the date on which the order copy made ready, and on such deposit, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Krishnagiri, on condition that 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, 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 is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs only) to the credit of Crime No.10 of 2022, within a period of two weeks from the date on which the order copy made ready.

[c] the final order in respect of the said deposit shall be passed by the learned trial Judge at conclusion of trial. [d] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

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

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

04.09.2023 mpl

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

mpl 04.09.2023