Sudhakar v. The State Rep By
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
The petitioners/A1 to A3, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2) and 74 of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.270 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant, Kalpana is that she is residing in a house owned by one Ramesh, who is her relative. On the day of occurrence, the petitioners had come to the defacto complainant's house and forcibly asked her to vacate the premises and when she questioned the same, the petitioners abused the defacto complainant and her daughters in filthy language and beaten them. Hence, the case. 4.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that due to tenancy dispute, a false complaint has been given. He would further submit that there is no previous case against the petitioners and the injured was treated as outpatient. He would further submit that the petitioners are ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
1/4
5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that due to tenancy dispute, the petitioners abused the defacto complainant and her daughters in filthy language and assaulted them. He would further submit that there is no previous case against the petitioner and the injured has been discharged from the hospital. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.
7.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and there is a tenancy dispute pending between the parties and that no previous case is pending against the petitioners and also taking into consideration the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions: [a] 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 of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Judicial Magistrate, Gudiyatham, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a 2/4
bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), each 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 said Magistrate, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:
[b] the 1st petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m until further orders and the petitioners 2 and 3 shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one week and thereafter, on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
[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 absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.
05.11.2024 ata 3/4
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
ata 05.11.2024 4/4