Kumar v. The State Rep By

P.DHANABAL, J.

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Section 393 of I.P.C. in Crime No.282 of 2003, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that while the defacto complainant was in his pawn broker shop, two persons came inside his shop and closed his mouth with hands and tried to taken away the jewels from his shop. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are an innocent person and they have not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. However, on instructions, the learned counsel further submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

1/5

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that while the defaco complainant in his pawn broker shop, two persons came inside his shop and closed his mouth with hands and tried to taken away the jewels from his shop and further, considering the gravity of offence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.

Considering the representations made by both sides and considering the nature of offences charged against the petitioners and also considering the fact that alleged offence took place in the year 2003 and so far the respondent has not secured the petitioners and also considering that investigation was already completed, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 6.

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his/her appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the Judicial Magistrate No. I, Mannargudi, Thiruvarur on condition that the petitioners 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 2/5

of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioners shall report before the Trial Court on everyday at 10.00 a.m, until further orders. [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 of 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] the petitioners shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. [f] 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 3/5

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].

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

19.09.2024 nsl 4/5

P.DHANABAL, J.

nsl 19.09.2024 5/5