Krishna Murthy v. State Rep By

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 506(i) of IPC r/w Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.569 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the de facto complainant Jayalakshmi is that while she was feeding the street dogs, the petitioner/accused abused the de facto complainant, assaulted her with hands and threatened her with dire consequences. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that when the de facto complainant was feeding the street dogs, the petitioner had questioned the same stating that it will endanger the Children around the

locality and a false case has been foisted against him. He would further submit that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that while the de facto complainant was feeding the street dogs, the petitioner/accused had questioned the same and abused the de facto complainant, assaulted her with hands and threatened her with dire consequences. He would further submit that there is no previous case pending as against the petitioner. However, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions of either side, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain 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 learned Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Madhavaram, Chennai - 600 060, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further conditions that: [a] the petitioner and 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 everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

arb/jas [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 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

16.11.2022 arb/jas