Ramakrishnan v. The State Represented By

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS Act in Crime No.321 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that, the defacto complainant one Mohamed Saleem has lodged a complaint, stating that he is running a saloon and the petitioner availed the service of the defacto complainant and refused to pay charges, hence a wordy quarrel arouse, thereby the petitioner along with other accused had assaulted the defacto complainant. Hence, this case. 3.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner had only accompanied with the co-accused, who had involved in the violence and assault with the defacto complainant. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to produce solvent sureties and to abide by any conditions 1/4

that may be imposed by this Court and also undertake to appear and to cooperate for the investigation, therefore, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.

Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, stating that the petitioner along with other accused assaulted the defacto complainant on account of wordy quarrel in the Saloon, thereby the defacto complainant sustained simple injury. He would further submit that the petitioner has no previous case.

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 considering the fact that there is no previous case as against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 2/4

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 Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur, Chennai on condition that the petitioner 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 6:30 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.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

3/4

stn [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 B.N.S.

20.11.2024 stn 4/4