Saravanan v. The State Rep.By

P. DHANABAL, J.

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 191(2), 191(3) and 118(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 in Crime No. 166 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners along with other accused persons assaulted the defacto complainant with knife and petrol bomb. The victim has been injured and subsequently, he was hospitalized. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit

that petitioners along with other accused attacked the defacto complainant and caused injuries and the injured has been discharged from the hospital. He further submitted that no previous cases are pending against the petitioner . However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5.Considering the rival submissions on either side and considering the fact that the nature of offence and the victim has been discharged from the hospital, no previous cases are pending against the petitioners and also considering all other aspects, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Ponneri on condition that the petitioners shall each 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent

Police on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of for four weeks and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation;

[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 to 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] 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];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

28.08.2024 kv

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Ponneri.

2. The Inspector of Police, E2, Thirupalaivanam Police Station, Redhills, Tiruvallur District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

P. DHANABAL, J kv 28.08.2024