ORDER :

This petition has been filed for modification of the conditions imposed by the learned CCB & CBCID Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai by order dated 19.07.2019 in Crl.M.P.No.7953 of 2019.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant received a phone call stating that they are offering personal loan through online and thereby the defacto complainant asked personal loan for a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- . Further they told the defacto complainant to invest some amount for sanctioning the loan and the investment amount will be repaid after the completion of loan. Accordingly, the complainant had transferred a sum of Rs.42,000/- through NEFT to their Bank Account. Thereafter, they did not arrange any loan and also refused to repay the amount. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.02.2019 by the respondent police. Further he would submit that, the petitioner was detained after the statutory period of 60 days and therefore, he filed a petition for the grant of statutory bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. The learned CCB & CBCID Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore was pleased to grant bail to the petitioner by an order dated 19.07.2019. However, while ordering bail to the petitioner, the learned Magistrate, imposed certain conditions as follows :-

"(i) the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.5 lakhs to the credit of Crime No.58 of 2019.

(ii) The petitioner/accused shall furnish two sureties for like sum of Rs.10,000/- to the satisfaction of this Court and one among the surety shall be a blood relative of the accused.

(iii) The petitioner/accused shall appear the sign before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., and 5.00 p.m., until further orders."

The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that while the petitioner was enlarged on statutory bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., no condition can be imposed and it is onerous and stringent. Therefore, he prays to modify the conditions imposed, while he was granted bail.

4. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that huge amount of money is involved in this case and the petitioner cheated the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.42,000/-. Therefore, she vehemently opposed to modify the condition imposed by the Court below.

5. Heard Mr.G.Mohana Krishnan learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs.M.Prabhavathi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

6. On perusal of the records, it is seen that the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.02.2019. Since the respondent did not filed the charge sheet, the Court below enlarged the petitioner on statutory bail, as per the procedure contemplated under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. While granting bail, the learned Magistrate imposed condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.5 lakhs to the credit of Crime no.58 of 2019, on the file of the respondent police. It is relevant to read the Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. as follows :-

"Section 167(2) - The Magistrate to whom an accused person is forwarded under this section may, whether he has or has not jurisdiction to try the case, from time to time, authorise the detention of the accused in such custody as such Magistrate thinks fit, a term not exceeding fifteen days in the whole; and if he has no jurisdiction to try the case or commit it for trial, and considers further detention unnecessary, he may order the accused to be forwarded to a Magistrate having such jurisdiction:

Provided that— (a) the Magistrate may authorise the detention of the accused person, otherwise than in the custody of the police, beyond the period of fifteen days, if he is satisfied that adequate grounds exist for doing so, but no Magistrate shall authorise the detention of the accused person in custody under this paragraph for a total period exceeding—

(i) ninety days, where the investigation rel