Mohammed Yousuf v. State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.27331 of 2022 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b) and 506(i) IPC in Crime No.270 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused had attempted to steal the goats belonging to the defacto complainant. When the defacto complainant informed the same to the parents of the petitioner and other accused persons, they went to the house of the defacto complainant and threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that the petitioner is aged about 18 years. Due to a previous enmity, the defacto complainant has given a false complaint against the petitioner. Hence, he prays to grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that petitioner along with other accused had attempted to stole the goats belonging to the defacto complainant. When the same was questioned, they went to the house of the defacto complainant and threatened him with dire consequences. He would further submit that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:-

6. 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 Judicial Magistrate No.II, Namakkal on condition that the petitioner shall

execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, of which one should be a blood related surety either father or mother of the petitioner, 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 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

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

Anu petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Courthimself 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.

10.11.2022 Anu Crl.O.P.No.27331 of 2022