Nagaraj v. State Rep.By Its
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Tenth day of January Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V. THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.411 of 2022 1 NAGARAJ [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 YUVARAJ 3 GNANAPRASHANTH @ PRASHANTH Vs STATE REP.BY ITS [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, B-6 MAPPEDU POLICE STATION, MAPPEDU, TIRUVALLUR DISTRICT.
CR.NO.485 OF 2021.
For Petitioner : M/S.M.DINESH Advocate For Respondent : MR. N.S.SUGANTHAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : M/S A.THIRUMARAN Advocate PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.10.2021 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 324, 452, 506 (2) and 307 of IPC, in Crime No.485 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that due to political enmity, on the date of occurrence, the petitioners assaulted the husband of the defacto complainant with deadly weapons, due to which, he sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are no way connected with the alleged offence and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioners names were not mentioned in the FIR. He would further submit that the petitioners have been suffering incarceration for more than 79 days from 23.11.2021 and hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioners.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
4. The learned Counsel for the intervenor submits that though the victim has been discharged from the hospital, the accused attacked the victim indiscriminately with an intention to murder him, the husband of the defacto complainant had sustained grievous injuries, to prove the same, he has produced the photographs. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would raise strong objection stating that as per the direction given by our High Court the investigation was conducted under the Supervision of DIG which was not yet completed. He further submits that the petitioners' earlier bail petition was dismissed by this Court in Crl.OP.No.22580 of 2021 dated 29.11.2021.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by both counsel and also considering the gravity of offence committed by the petitioners, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 10/01/2022 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 SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL, CHENNAI 2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, B-6 MAPPEDU POLICE STATION, MAPPEDU, TIRUVALLUR DISTRICT.
3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, MADRAS. CC to M/S.P.SUGUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.411/2022 Date :10/01/2022 RVR 24/01/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/