Prakash v. State Represented By

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 121(1), 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 24 of TN Prohibition Act, in Crime No.499 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that as per the F.I.R, the defacto complainant was in-charge of the patrol vehicle of the respondent Police. While so, they were patrolling in the process of closing the cars within the permitted time, it came to the notice the bar was functioning beyond permitted hours. When the de-facto complainant questioned the same and attempted to enter the bar, the 2nd and 4th accused resisted him and they pushed down the de-facto complainant and attacked him with hands. The first petitioner is the Supervisor and the second petitioner is the owner of the bar and they are not present at the scene of the occurrence during the alleged time. Hence the case.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and a false complaint has been given against them. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent while opposing grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner would submit that the co-accused already arrested and released on bail and the injured had been discharged from the hospital. No previous case is pending against the petitioners.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the FIR.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and the injured has been discharged from the hospital, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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 XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, 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 petitioner 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 06.30 p.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d] the petitioner 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 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]. [f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

14.11.2024 nvi

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

nvi 14.11.2024