Dilliraj .R v. State By

P.DHANABAL,J.

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506(i) of IPC in Crime No.447 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners had entered into a lease agreement with the defacto complainant for a sum of Rs.5 lakhs and after obtaining the amount, the petitioners did not let the premises for lease. Due to which, there was a wordy quarrel between them. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit with an intention to grab the property, the defacto complainant has given a false complaint against the petitioners. He would also submit that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

1/4

4.The learned Government advocate(Crl.Side) would submit that the petitioners had entered into a lease agreement with the defacto complainant for a sum of Rs.5 lakhs and after obtaining the amount, the petitioners did not let the premises for lease. Due to which, there was a wordy quarrel between them. He also submitted there is no previous case pending against the petitioners. However, he objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5.Heard both side and perused the materials available on record. 6.Considering the rival submissions on either side and also of the fact that there is no previous case pending against the petitioners and there is a dispute between the petitioner in respect of rental agreement and there is no specific overt act attributed as against the petitioners 2 and 3 and also considering the nature of offences leveled against the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following 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 2/4

the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned XVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of 30 days;

[b] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

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

[d] 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].

[e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

01.10.2024 vkr 3/4

P.DHANABAL,J vkr 01.10.2024 4/4