Thirumurugan v. State Rep.By

Crl.O.P.No.25654 of 2024 P.DHANABAL, J.

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 364, 392, 394 of IPC @ 364, 392, 394, 397 of IPC, in Crime No.180 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused kidnapped the defacto complainant and by threatening him, had transferred a sum of Rs.2,000/- through his google pay account. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and co-accused have been released on bail. However, on instructions, the learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing 1/4

for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner along with other accused kidnapped the defacto complainant and by threatening him, had transferred a sum of Rs.2,000/- through his google pay account. He further submitted that there is no previous case against petitioner. He also submitted that the property was recovered from the co-accused. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.

Considering the representations made by both sides and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner and there is no previous case against the petitioner and co-accused had been arrested and later, released on bail and the property was recovered from the co-accused, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

6.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his/her appearance, within a period of fifteen

(15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli, on condition that the petitioner 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 2/4

satisfaction of the 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, on everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [b] the petitioner 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 him from disclosing such facts of the Court or to any police officer.

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

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

[e] the petitioner shall make himself/herself 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 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].

P.DHANABAL, J.

3/4

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

19.10.2024 vkr 4/4