L.Dhairiyanathan vs State

T.V.Thamilselvi, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.11.2022 for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 397 and 506(ii) of I.P.C. in Crime No.513 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of prosecution is that on 31.10.2022 at about 01.00 a.m., when the defacto complainant going to his house after completion of his duty, one auto came nearby to him, five persons got off from the auto and they said to have tried to snatch his mobile phone, thereby, they scolded him using filthy language and also attacked him with knife. Hence, the complaint was registered against the petitioner.

The learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that this is the second petition seeking for bail and the entire allegation in the F.I.R. is false, vindictive, wanton and he is no way connected with the offence. He would submit 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 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 62 days from 01.11.2022. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that totally, there are 4 accused and the petitioner is arrayed as A4. He would submit that when the defacto complainant going back to his house after completion of duty, the petitioner along with other accused waylaid him and snatched his mobile and also attacked him with knife. He would submit that there are three previous cases pending against him. 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 the fact that he was released on bail in the other three previous cases and the investigation almost completed and considering the nature of offence committed by the petitioner and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

Accordingly, 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 for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II at Ulundurpet, 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 daily at 10.30 a.m. for the period of two months and thereafter, on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for another 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.