Allowed

Arikrishnan v. the State Represented by

Madras HC9 Dec 2024CRL OP/30664/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought anticipatory bail in a forest offence case alleging theft of teakwood from the complainant's land, claiming false implication due to a property dispute. The court granted anticipatory bail with conditions including bond execution, sureties, periodic police reporting, and non-tampering.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; petitioners to be released on bond of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties, subject to surrender within fifteen days and reporting conditions.

Arikrishnan Vs the State Represented by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.30664 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 09.12.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.30664 of 2024

¶7

Arikrishnan 2. Jayaraman ... Petitioners

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The State represented by, Forest Range Officer, Ambur Forest Station (Vadapudupettu Section), Thirupathur District. (STOR No.02 of 2024)

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent police concerned in STOR No.02 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police.

¶12

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Parthiban For Respondent : Mr.S.Santhosh

¶13

Page No.1 of 5

¶14

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

¶15

Crl.O.P.No.30664 of 2024

¶16

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

Apprehending arrest in connection with STOR No.2 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 35, 36, 41, 51, 49-A, 49-B, 49-G, 56, 56B, 56C, 56D of Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 and Section 2, 3 (ii), 9 of Tamil Nadu Timber Transit Rule 1968 and Section 2, 3, 4 of Tamil Nadu Timber (movement control) order and Section 2, 3A and 4 TNM a/c ST for Industrial or Common rules 1988.

¶19

2.Pleading innocence on the part of the petitioners, false implication in

¶20

the case, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks indulgence of this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that due to property dispute, a false complaint has been lodged. He would further submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have been unnecessarily implicated in this case. He also submits that the petitioners have no previous case against them. He also submits that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court.

¶21

Page No.2 of 5

¶22

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

¶23

Crl.O.P.No.30664 of 2024

¶24

3.The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police, opposing for grant of anticipatory bail, is that on 15.11.2024 at 09.30pm, the petitioners along with other accused entered into the defacto complainant's land and took away the 26 pieces of teakwood total of 2.460kgs, worth about Rs.50,000/-. He also submits that there is no previous cases pending against the petitioners.

¶25

4.Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions and accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Ambur, Thirupathur on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond each for a

¶26

Page No.3 of 5

¶27

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

¶28

Crl.O.P.No.30664 of 2024

¶29

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 said Magistrate, on further condition that:

¶30

[a] if the petitioners fail to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;

¶31

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶32

[c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶33

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶34

[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];

¶35

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

¶36

Page No.4 of 5

¶37

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

¶38

Crl.O.P.No.30664 of 2024

¶39

09.12.2024

¶40

¶41