Dharmaraj v. State Rep.By

P. DHANABAL.J., The petitioner / Accused who apprehends arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 306 of B.N.S. 2023 in connection with the Cr. No.279 of 2024, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is working in the Evergreen Security Service and Pudumavilangai Village Tower and on the occurrence day, some unknown persons theft the Ammaraja 600 AH-24 nos. battery kept in the Tower. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent, that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant, that he is no way connected with the commission of offences and that he is ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Hence he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police would contend that the accused had committed theft of 24 nos of batteries, which were kept in the Pudumavilangai Village

Tower. Hence he objected for the grant of anticipatory bail. Further he submitted that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the arguments putforth on either side, considering the nature of offences and allegations charged against the petitioner and considering the fact that no previous case is pending against the petitioner, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready before the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tiruvallur on condition that the 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on

every Saturday for a period of 4 weeks and thereafter as and when required for investigation.

[b] the petitioner 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

[c] the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

[d] the petitioner 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 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].

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered

under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

11.09.2024 mjs To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tiruvallur 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

3.The Inspector of Police, Kadambathur Police Station, Tiruvallur District. P.DHANABAL,J mjs

CRL O.P. No.22271 of 2024 11.09.2024