Tirupathi @ Mullai Tirupathi v. The State Rep By

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 333, 296(b), 115(2), 118(2), 351(2), 189(2) of BNS Act in Crime No.678 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.

The case of the prosecution is that due to political dispute, the petitioners along with co-accused trespassed into the studio, where the defacto complainant was giving interview, abused and attacked the defacto complainant, thereby the defacto complainant sustained injuries and further the petitioners have also threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences. Hence, this case.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case, only with a view to harass the petitioners. He further submitted that the petitioners are

not involved in any political parties and they are ready to produce solvent sureties and to abide with any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, therefore, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4.

Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners stating that the petitioners along with other accused have abused and attacked the defacto complainant, due to political dispute between them, thereby the defacto complainant sustained minor injuries. He further submitted that the injured was discharged from the hospital. 5.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record including the FIR. 6.

Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also considering the fact that the injured was discharged from the hospital, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain 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 the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vaniyambadi on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 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 petitioners 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 petitioners 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 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

13.11.2024 stn A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J., stn

13.11.2024