Allowed

P. Marimuthu v. Inspector of Police

Madras HC20 Sept 2023CRL OP/21398/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a criminal proceeding involving IPC sections 294(b), 509 and 506(2). The order imposed strict conditions including daily reporting to police, execution of a separate bond, and prohibitions on tampering with evidence or absconding, with Section 229A IPC applicable in case of default.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon execution of separate bond with sureties and compliance with strict conditions including daily reporting.

P. Marimuthu Vs Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.21398 of 202 3

¶2

Crl.O.P.No.21398 of 2023

¶3

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

¶4

The Petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the Respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 509 & 506(2) of IPC in Crime No.183 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶5

2.The case of the prosecution is that the Defacto Complainant and the Petitioner are doing same business in the same locality and due to the business rivalry, the Petitioner abused the Defacto Complainant in filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences. Hence the complaint.

¶6

3.The learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner was served as Havildar in Indian Army from the year 1979 and retired from service in the year 1997. The Defacto Complainant and the Petitioner are doing the same business and the Defacto Complainant interfering the Petitioner's business and grabbing every business opportunity in a deceitful manner. Since the Defacto Complainant is the most influential person in the locality, he managed to register a false case against the Petitioner. Hence, the learned counsel for the Petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the Petitioner.

¶7

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the Respondent 1/ 4

¶8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶9

Crl.O.P.No.21398 of 202 3

¶10

vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner.

¶11

5.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶12

6.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case

¶13

and also the submissions made by the learned counsel on either sides and the nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner with certain conditions.

¶14

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, be fore the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sirkazhi, 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:

¶15

[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;

¶16

[b] the Petitioner shall report before the Respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

2/ 4

¶19

Crl.O.P.No.21398 of 202 3

¶20

thereafter as and when required;

¶21

[c] the Petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶22

[d] the Petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶23

[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].

¶24

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

¶25

20.09.2023

¶26

sai

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

3/ 4

¶29

Crl.O.P.No.21398 of 202 3