Santhi v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.09.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.DHANABAL 1.Santhi 2.Latha ... Petitioners Vs.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, R.S.Puram Police Station, Coimbatore.

(Crime No. 278 of 2024).

... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., pleased to enlarge the petitioners on bail, in Crime No. 278 of 2024 on the file of the respondent Police.

For Petitioners : Mr.A.Saranraj For Respondent : Mr.S.Vinothkumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.09.2024, for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 1/6

109, 329(4), 351(3) @ 109, 191(2), 191(3), 329(4), 332(b), 351(3), 61(2)(a) of BNS in Crime No. 278 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant, who works as a collection agent in a Finance Company was attacked by the accused, who are all friends. Due to previous enmity between the defacto complainant and the accused, on 27.08.2024, at about 7.00 p.m, all the accused trespassed into the place of occurrence and attacked the defacto complainant with a knife, stone, causing injuries to his neck, hand and other vital organs. Hence, the complaint.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submit that they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submit that the petitioner's name was not found place in the FIR and they are in judicial custody for more than 20 days. Hence, he prayed for bail stating that, the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. 2/6

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police raised objection stating that there are totally 16 accused in this case and the petitioners herein are arrayed as A9 and A10. He further submits that on the date of the alleged occurrence, due to previous enmity, the petitioner along with other accused persons trespassed into the place of occurrence and attacked the defacto complainant with a knife and a stone, causing injuries to him. He further submits that the injured was discharged from the hospital. He further submits that the petitioners have no previous case, pending against them. However, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.

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

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and that the petitioners are not the named accused in the FIR and considering the period of incarceration undergone by 3/6

the petitioners, injured was discharged from the hospital, and the petitioners have no previous case, pending against them, and also considering all others factors, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each, with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Coimbatore, and on further conditions that:- [a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

[b] the Petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;

[c] 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 to the Court or to any police officer;

4/6

[d] the Petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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 [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

19.09.2024 drl To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Coimbatore.

2.The Inspector of Police, R.S.Puram Police Station, Coimbatore.

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Women's Special Cell, Coimbatore. 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

P.DHANABAL, J.

5/6

drl 19.09.2024 6/6