S.Jayanthi v. State Rep.By

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 306 and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.653 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant is that the defacto complainant's husband Rajkumar, borrowed a sum of Rs.5 lakhs from A1. Thereafter, the said Rajkumar borrowed a sum of Rs.2 lakhs from A2. Both of them received pro note from the said Rajkumar. On 06.12.2022, A1 demanded a sum of Rs.32,00,000/- and the A2 demanded a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- from the said Rajkumar due to a wordy quarrel arose between them, the accused persons abused the deceased in filthy language. Thereafter, the deceased consumed pesticide in front of the A1's house and died. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that this is the second application for anticipatory bail and the earlier application was dismissed by this Court on the ground that considering the gravity of the 1/4

offence committed by the petitioner. He further submits that due to previous money dispute between the petitioners and the deceased, and also with the influence of the defacto complainant who wanted to show her personal grudge against the petitioners, they were falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that they are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submits that the defacto complainant's husband received Rs.5 lakhs and Rs.2 lakhs from the accused persons and he was regularly paying the amount with interest. The accused persons demanded exorbitant interest from the deceased and assaulted him due to which, the deceased consumed pesticide and died. He further submits that investigation is in initial stage. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Considering the gravity of offence committed by the petitioners and there is no change in circumstances of the case, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

2/4

6. Accordingly, the criminal original petition stands dismissed. 23.01.2023 vkr 3/4

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

vkr 23.01.2023 4/4