Dhilip @ DMR Dhilip vs State

K. Rajasekar, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.06.2025 based on execution of NBW dated 17.02.2025 inS.C.No.44 of 2024 on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Arakkonam at Ranipet District for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 341, 342, 302, 294(b), 307 r/w 149 of IPC, seeks bail.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that originally the petitioner was earlier arrested and released on bail and was regularly appearing before the Trial Court for the case in S.C.No.44 of 2024; that since the petitioner was arrested and remanded by the respondent police in connection with another case in S.C.No.71 of 2024 on 07.02.2025, he was unable to appear before the Trial Court in this case on 17.02.2025, hence a NBW was issued against the petitioner and subsequently, he was arrested on 19.06.2025. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and sought for bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent while opposing the bail to the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was on bail earlier, since he has not appeared before the Trial Court during the pendency of the trial, a NBW was issued and subsequently, he was arrested; that the petitioner has 14 previous cases and history sheeter; that there are totally 27 witnesses in this case and out of which only five more witnesses are yet to be examined; and that the case is posted for next hearing on 12.01.2026.

I have considered the submissions made on both sides and perused the materials available on record, including the report received from the concerned Trial Court, which states that certain witnesses were not property produced by the prosecution.

Considering the facts of the case, though it is stated that the petitioner herein has previous antecedents, he was already granted bail in this case and he had appeared before the Trial Court for several hearings, the fact that the trial is pending due to delay in producing the witnesses by the prosecution and taking note of the period of incarceration undergone by 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.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Court, Arakkonam at Ranipet District and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court concerned daily at 10:30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the defacto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police officer as and when required;

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

[f] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.