Prasanth @ Rajivprasath v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 30.12.2020 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM Crl.O.P.No.20929 of 2020 Prasanth @ Rajiv Prasath ... Petitioner - Vs. - The State rep. By ... Respondent The Inspector of Police, Thiruverkadu Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.979 of 2020).

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with the Crime No.979 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Shankar For Respondent : Mr.K.Madhan Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The Petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.11.2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 147,148,294(b), 323,324,307,336 & 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, in Crime No.979 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused persons unlawfully assembled with deadly weapon, abused the defacto complainant with filthy language and assaulted him with knife in order to commit murder and also threatened with dire consequences. The petitioner is arrayed as A2 out of five accused. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he is the only breadwinner of the family and the co-accused has already been enlarged on bail. Hence, he prays to grant of bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner along with other accused persons was consuming alcohol in a play ground adjacent to the defacto complainant's house. When the defacto complainant was questioned the attitude to the petitioner and other accused, they were attacked the defacto complainant with knife and caused injuries and he admitted in the hospital. Thereafter, the victim has been discharged from the hospital. The learned Government Advocate would further submit that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant of bail to the petitioner.

5.Heard the learned Counsel on either side. Perused F.I.R. and other materials placed on record.

6.Overall consideration of the facts, the nature of accusation, the nature of offences, the materials in support of the accusation and the circumstances of the case and the period of detention of the petitioner in the judicial custody, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

(a) Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Poonamallee, and on further conditions that: (b) 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;

(c) the petitioner on his release from prison shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

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

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

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

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

7.With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.

-sd/- 30/12/2020 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.II, POONAMALLEE.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THIRUVALLUR [FOR INFORMATION].

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVERKADU POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

5 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL.

+1 CC to M/S.S.SHANKAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR NO 8738 CRL OP.20929/2020 Date :30/12/2020 MN-30/12/2020