Jayakumar, v. State Rep. By The Sub

Crl.O.P.No. 8 1 9 2 of 2 0 1 6 K. KALYANA S U NDARAM, J.

The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC, in Crime No.130 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has purchased the vehicle without the knowledge that it is a theft vehicle, which is stolen by A1 from the defacto complainant and sold to the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the co-accused were granted anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.No.8040 of 2016 on 11.04.2016. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no bad antecedents.

5.Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

K.KALYANA S U NDARAM, J vs

6. Accordingly, 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, Ponneri and 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 Magistrate concerned and the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. 7.The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. 1 2. 0 4. 2 0 1 6 vs Crl.O.P.No. 8 1 9 2 of 2 0 1 6