Dasarathan v. State Rep. By

P.DHANABAL, J.

The petitioners who apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 118(1) and 351(3) of the BNS in Crime No.993 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners had attacked the de facto complainant and his friends without any reason. Hence, the complaint.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that the petitioners had not committed any offence as alleged and the petitioners had been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that they are ready and willing to furnish substantial sureties for their due release and abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court and therefore, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 1/4

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioners had attacked and de facto complainant and his friends for no reason and they all sustained injuries and that except the second petitioner/accused all the other petitioners have previous cases and further, considering the gravity of offence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5.

Considering the representations made by both sides and considering the nature of offences charged against the petitioners and though, there are previous cases as against some of the petitioners, they were all arrested and granted bail and as the injured was discharged from hospital, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

6.

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen

(15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the Judicial Magistrate II, Salem on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (each) (Rupees Ten Thousand Only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the 2/4

respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday at 10:30 a.m., for four weeks. [b] 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 then from disclosing such facts of the Court or to any police officer.

[c] the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate P.DHANABAL, J.

vca 3/4

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].

[g] If the petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

20.09.2024 vca 4/4