Navamani v. State Rep. By

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

The Petitioners/A6, A7 and A9 in Crime No.232 of 2023 registered by the Respondent Police originally as woman missing and subsequently, altered to Sections 364, 212, 109 and 120(B) IPC, seek anticipatory bail.

2. It is stated by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) that the defacto complainant had lodged a complaint that he is married and having two children and his wife used to go to school in car. But on 15.11.2023, his wife did not return and even the Accused A1 had also not returned. The Petitioners herein are the relatives of the Accused A1.

3. The investigation will have to be done relating to what happened to the woman who is missing namely wife of the defacto complainant. It is the responsibility of the Petitioners to cooperate during the course of the investigation and diverge the information.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) stated that a Non-statutory Habeas Corpus Petition is also pending. 1/3

5. In view of that particular fact and also the fact that only the car of the wife of the defacto complainant alone had been recovered with blood stains in the same and the fact that there may be possibility of further alteration of the offences, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioners herein.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 30.01.2024 mkn2 2/3

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

mkn2 30.01.2024 3/3