Arunachalam v. The Inspector Of Police
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.378 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution as per the de facto complainant M.Kalaiyarasi, is that on 31.10.2022 at about 7.00 a.m., the petitioners trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and on account of civil dispute, the petitioners had abused the de facto complainant with filthy language, threatened her with dire consequences and also assaulted her with Aruvamanai (Vegetable Cutter), due to which, she sustained injuries. Hence the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence
as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioners are ready and willing to furnish solvent sureties and to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) for the respondent would submit that the petitioners had abused the de facto complainant with filthy language, threatened her with dire consequences and also assaulted her with Aruvamanai (Vegetable Cutter), due to which, she sustained injuries. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions of either side, 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, Additional Fast Track Mahila Court at Salem, on condition that each of the petitioner shall execute a separate 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 everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
arb [d] the petitioners 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 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].
[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
14.11.2022 arb