Vijay @ Viji v. The State Rep By Its,

P.DHANABAL,J.

The petitioner/accused who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Section 192(2), 192(3), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) BNS r/w 4 of Women Harassment Act in Crime No.509 of 2024 seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the defacto complainant regarding family dispute, due to which, the petitioner along with others had abused and assaulted the defacto complainant and his family members and caused injuries to them and also threatened them with dire consequences. 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. He further submits that he is ready to abide by any stringent conditions imposed by this Court. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submits that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the defacto complainant regarding family dispute, due to which, the petitioner along with others had abused and assaulted the defacto complainant and his family members and caused injuries to them and also threatened them with dire consequences. He further submits that the injured was discharged from the hospital. However, he vehemently opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the nature of offence, there is no previous case against the petitioner and there was a family dispute between the parties, injured was also discharged from the hospital and considering all other aspects, 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 Additional Mahila Court (Magistrate Level), Thiruvallur 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 satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks. [b] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[c] the petitioner 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 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].

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

30.10.2024 Vv

P.DHANABAL, J.

Vv 30.10.2024