Jeevanantham @ Jeeva v. The State Rep By Its The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 02.11.2022

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Jeevanantham @ Jeeva ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Rasipuram Police Station, Namakkal District.

(Crime No.1148/2021) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with the Crime No.1148 of 2021 pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.W.Camyles Gandhi For Respondent : Mr.C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/6

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.09.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 448, 294(b), 324, 506(i) of IPC r/w 3(i) of TNPPDL Act, in Crime No.1148 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to the existing financial dispute between the first and second accused and the de-facto complainant's husband, the first and second accused by engaging hench men, trespassed into the house of the de-facto complainant, abused and assaulted the de-facto complainant with iron rod, causing serious injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this is the second bail application before this court, whereas, the first bail application has been dismissed as withdrawn. He would further submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been implicated in this case, only based on the confession statement recorded from the other accused. He would also submit that this case is of the year 2021 and the injured has also been discharged from the hospital and the similarly placed co-accused have 2/6

been granted with anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.Nos.22197, 21517, 21272, 22655 of 2021. He would also submit that the petitioner is in custody from 14.09.2022 and he is prepared to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court and hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner, who is arrayed as A14 in this case, is the hench men of A1 and on the instructions given by the first accused, he had assaulted the de-facto complainant with iron rod. He would further submit that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. He would also submit that as far as this petitioner is concerned, there is a previous case pending as against the petitioner which is registered for the offence under Section 307 IPC. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and perused the materials available on record.

3/6

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7. 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 Judicial Magistrate, Rasipuram and on further conditions that: [a] 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;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, every day at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [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 4/6

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 229A IPC; 02.11.2022 ham To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Rasipuram.

2. The Inspector of Police, Rasipuram Police Station, Namakkal District.

3. The Central Prison, Salem.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA.,J.

ham 02.11.2022 6/6