Kannivel vs State

T.V.Thamilselvi, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.03.2024 for the alleged offence under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended by the PC (Amendment) Act, 2018 in Crime No.4 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of prosecution is that on 11.03.2024, the defacto complainant approached the petitioner/A1 Kannivel, who worked as Surveyor in Tiruvathipuram Municipality for name change in patta from his previous owner and to issue it in his favour, for which A1 said to have demanded a sum of Rs.40,000/- as bribe from him. Accordingly, on 12.03.2024, the respondent police laid trap and caught hold of him. Hence, a complaint was registered against the petitioner.

The learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that he has not at all committed any of offence as alleged by the respondent police and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he will abide by any condition that may be imposed by this court. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 22 days from 12.03.2024. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that when the defacto complainant seeking to transfer the patta in his name from his previous owner, he approached A1/Surveyor, petitioner herein, for which he demanded a sum of Rs.40,000/-and to assist him, he engaged A2 and he is a person collected amount from the defacto complainant and so far, the phenolphthalein test report was not received. He would submit that totally there are two accused involved in this case, in which the petitioner is arrayed as A1. He would submit that that if he is released on bail, he would tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation and the investigation is almost completed. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

Considering the above facts and circumstances, and also considering the fact that so far phenolphthalein test report was not received, however preliminary enquiry was completed and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner from 12.03.2024 for more than 22 days, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) as non-refundable deposit to the credit of Ramakrishna Math, No.31, Ramakrishna Math Road, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004 for the purpose of improvisation of leprosy infrastructure and on such deposit, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each, in which one surety must be a blood surety, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruvannamalai, and on further conditions that:

(a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned 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 on every Wednesday at 10.30 a.m. for the period of three months ;

(c) the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature;

(d) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(e) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(f) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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];

(g) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.