Abraham, v. The State Rep By
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of B.N.S., 2023 in Crime No.259 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant Sarin is that on 03.11.2024, due to previous enmity, while the defacto complainant along with his friends taking alcohol in an agricultural field, the petitioner/accused in an inebriated condition abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and also assaulted him in wooden log. Hence, this case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent persons and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that it is a case in counter and a F.I.R. has been registered at the instance of petitioner in Crime No. 260 of 2024
against the defacto complainant. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners stating that it is a case in counter and as far as the allegation in this case against the petitioner is concerned, he had abused the defacto complainant and assaulted him with wooden log. He would submit that there is no previous case pending against him.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, 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 it is a case in counter and there is no previous case pending against the petitioner, 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 learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyur, 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 06.30 p.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter on every Saturday 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 of B.N.S. 18.11.2024 rpp
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J., rpp 18.11.2024