Ananiah Livingston v. State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07.12.2021

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.O.P.No.23684 of 2021 Ananiah Livingston ... Petitioner Vs.

State by, The Inspector of Police, Traffic Investigation Wing, Pondy Bazar, Chennai- 600 017.

(Crime No.235 of 2021)

...Respondent

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.235 of 2021 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Traffic Investigation Wing, Pondy Bazar, Chennai For Petitioner : Mr.Suner Mohan For Respondent : Mr.N.S.Suganthan Government Advocate

ORDER

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.12.2021 for the offences under Sections 279, 308 of IPC and Section 185 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, in Crime No.235 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 01.12.2021 at about 00.30 Hours, the petitioner in a drunken mood, drove his car in a rash and negligent manner and collided against a lorry near Kodambakkam High Road and caused an accident. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Even as per prosecution, no one was injured and the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 5 days from 01.12.2021. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to any Charitable Institute as may be directed by this Court and he would pray for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) raised objection stating that the petitioner in a drunken mood drove the car in a rash and negligent manner and hit against a lorry and caused an accident but admits that the investigation is almost completed.

5. Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner shall be directed to make a non refundable deposit of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only), to the credit of the Tamil Nadu Registered Advocate Clerks Association, Chennai, without prejudice to his rights and contentions. The amount so deposited shall be utilised by the Association for the welfare of the Advocates.

6. It is made clear that the deposit of the amount by the petitioner to the said Authority would not amount to admission of guilt. The trial Court shall deal with the case independently on merits without reference to the amount deposited at the stage of bail.

7. Considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner and that the investigation almost completed, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

8. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing 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 Learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, and on further conditions that:

(a) the petitioner shall make non-refundable deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) through demand draft to the Tamil Nadu Registered Advocate Clerks Association, Chennai, without prejudice to his defence before the trial Court and the learned Judicial Magistrate, after perusing the challan/ receipt, shall accept the sureties furnished by the petitioner; (b)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; (c) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Sunday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders; (d)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(e)the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(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]; and;

(g)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

-sd/- 07/12/2021 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 XVIII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, SAIDAPET, CHENNAI.

2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION WING, PONDY BAZAR, CHENNAI-600 017.

4 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, SUB JAIL, SAIDAPET, CHENNAI.

5 THE TAMIL NADU REGISTERED ADVOCATE CLERKS ASSOCIATION, HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

6 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+2CC to M/S.SUNER MOHAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.14153 CRL OP.23684/2021 Date :07/12/2021 CSK 07/12/2021