Aravindhan v. State Rep By

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 448, 323, 506(ii) of IPC r/w Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.420 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on account of dispute with regard to water connection, the petitioner along with other accused had abused the de facto complainant with filthy language, intimidated her and assaulted her. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the de facto complainant and the first accused/A1 are neighbours and the petitioner has been unnecessarily roped into this case. He would also submit that

there is no previous case as against the petitioner. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent would submit that due to the dispute with regard to water connection, there was a quarrel between the de facto complainant and the petitioner, wherein the petitioner along with other accused had abused the de facto complaint with filthy language, intimidated her and also assaulted her. He would further submit that there is no previous case as against the petitioner. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions of either side, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7. 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-2, Kallakurichi, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a 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 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 everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

arb/jas [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.

16.11.2022 arb/jas