Murugan v. The State Rep By Its,
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA.J, The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 353, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 12 of Gaming Act in Crime No.241 of 2022, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners were illegally gambling in the place of occurrence, when the Police Officials went to the place of occurrence and attempted to apprehend them, they have intimidated the Police Officials and prevented them from discharging his official duty. Hence the complaint.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and based on the confession statement given by A2, the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that they have nothing to do with the alleged offence. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioners were illegally gambling in the place of occurrence, when the Police Officials went to the place of occurrence and attempted to apprehend them, they have intimidated the Police Officials and prevented them from discharging his official duty. He would further submit that there is no previous case pending as against the petitioners. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent Police and perused the entire materials available on record including the First Information Report.
6.Taking note of the facts and circumstances and also of the submissions made by the learned counsel, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ulundurpet, on condition that each of the petitioners 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 condition that :
[a]the petitioners 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent police every day at 10.30 a.m and 5.30 p.m., until further orders.
[e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
[f] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[g] 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 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]; and;
[h] if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.
04.11.2022 vkr
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA.J, vkr 04.11.2022