V.Arumugam vs State

A.D.Jagadish Chandira, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13.02.2023, for the offences punishable under Sections 381, 120B, 408, 109 & 201 of IPC, in Crime No.511 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution as per the de-facto complainant, Vijyanand, who is engaged in the business of exporting garments in the name of M/s.Knit Gallery in partnership with his brother for about 15 years, is that he had stocked his fabrics in Little Flower Convent back side, Mangalam Road and A1/G.Nagendran, who was an in-charge of the said stock godown, had misappropriated 7320 Kilograms of fabrics, worth of several lakhs, kept in the stock godown. Further allegation is that A1 has sold the fabrics to A2, for a meager price and the second accused, who in turn purchased the fabrics with an intend to make unlawful gain. Hence the case.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person, who is involved in the business dealing with textiles and fabrics. He further submitted that the petitioner, on believing the first accused, has innocently purchased the fabrics from him. He further submitted that the petitioner himself is also a victim in this case and he is suffering incarceration from 13.02.2023. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner along with other accused colluded each other and have stolen surplus garment fabrics from the factory of the de-facto complainant and looted several lakhs. He further submitted that the fabrics worth about Rs.15lakhs have been recovered from the premises of the petitioner and also stated that no previous case is pending as against the petitioner, however, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and perused the materials available on record.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also considering the allegation made against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing 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, Tiruppur, 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner 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 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 229A IPC.