P.Ramesh v. The Inspector Of Polcie
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.
The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.106 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is working in the petrol bunk and the petitioner went to the petrol bunk and asked him to fill fuel for his two wheeler, but the defacto complainant refused to do so. Due to which, there was a wordy quarrel arose between them and during the quarrel, the petitioner had attacked the defacto complainant and caused injuries to him. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was earlier granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.20645 of 2022 vide Order dated 29.08.2022, however, he was unable to furnish the sureties and thereby, the earlier Order has got lapsed and the present anticipatory bail has been filed.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner had picked up a quarrel with the defacto complainant and during the quarrel, the petitioner had attacked him and caused injuries. He would further submit that the petitioner was earlier granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.20645 of 2022 vide Order dated 29.08.2022, however, he failed to execute the sureties. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5.In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner is also ready to deposit an amount of Rs.1,000/- to any welfare scheme of the Government and prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6.Merely, because the petitioner has deposited the said amount, it would not amount to admission of his guilt. Therefore, it is open to the trial Court to deal with the case independently.
7.Taking into consideration the facts of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel and also taking note of the fact that the petitioner has come forward to deposit an amount of Rs.1,000/- to any welfare scheme of the Government, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 8.Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.
1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) to the credit of Taluk Legal Services Authority, attached to the concerned Court and on such receipt and on receipt of proof of payment, 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 Judicial Magistrate, Veppanthattai, Perambalur District on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.
concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition 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 daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.
[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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC;
21.11.2022 vkr
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.
vkr 21.11.2022