Jeevanantham v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.01.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA 1.Jeevanantham ... Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.32686 of 2024 2.Logesh ... Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.209 of 2025 Vs.
The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, J-1, Saidapet Police Station.
(Crime No.317 of 2024).
... Respondent COMMON PRAYER : Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioners on bail, in connection with Crime No.317 of 2024, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police.
In both Crl.O.Ps For Petitioners :
Mr.M.Manimaran For Respondent :
Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side) COMMON ORDER Petitions seeking bail in respect of Crime No.317 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4) and 305(a) of BNS, is on board for consideration.
1/4
2. The incarceration of the petitioners being from 18.11.2024 pleading innocence on the part of the petitioners and false implication in the case, the learned counsel for the petitioners seek indulgence of this Court. He further submits that the petitioners are only 21 years old and are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this court. Hence, he prayed for bail.
3. The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for grant of bail, is that the petitioners along with other accused trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and committed theft of one (5 gram silver coin), three (1 gram silver coins), Laptop, Casio Watch and ATM card belonging to the defacto complainant. He would submit that the petitioners have got 2 previous cases each, therefore, if the petitioners are released on bail, there is a possibility of them absconding and not available for further investigation. He would also submit that the laptop has not been recovered yet.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record and considering the period of incarceration 2/4
undergone by the petitioners, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions and accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties, of which one shall be either father or mother of the petitioners, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai and on further conditions that: [a] 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 petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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];
3/4
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA.,J.
Anu [f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
08.01.2025 Anu To
1. The IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai 2.The Inspector of Police, J-1, Saidapet Police Station.
3. The Superintendent, Puzhal Central Prison-II
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
4/4