Arunkumar v. The State Rep By Its,
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.12.2022 for the alleged offence under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. And subsequently it was altered into Sections 306 of I.P.C. in Crime No.211 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that deceased Sandhya married to one Mr.Vijayakumar in 2014 and they were willing in Kottanalli village. During the matrimonial life, she used to talk with A1 frequently in the roof top of her house and when the same was questioned by her husband, the deceased committed suicide by consuming poison and died. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are relatives and neighbours of deceased. He would submit that her husband living in the same village and just because their mobile number
shown in the call details, they were arrayed as accused. He would also submit that they have not at all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police and they are no way connected with the offence. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration from 24.12.2022. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that petitioners and two others used to chat with the deceased and they would come to roof top of deceased house during night hours and talk with her, when it was questioned by her husband, she did not reply and even then she talked with him over phone. He would submit that when the deceased decided to stop sending messages, the petitioners threatened her that they would reveal the details of chat to her husband. In the said circumstances, she committed suicide by consuming poison and died. He would also submit that if he is released on bail, he will tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation and the investigation is not yet completed. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.
5. On seeing the facts, it reveals that the petitioners are relatives and 1st petitioner is an unmarried man and he is a neighbour of the deceased and he used to talk with her and also had chat with her through mobile phone, when it was questioned by her husband, deceased committed suicide by consuming poison and died. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by both counsel and considering the gravity of offence committed by the petitioner, and also considering the fact that the petitioners continuously causing disturbance to her and they are the cause for committing suicide of deceased by consuming poison and died leaving two children and the fact that if they are released on bail, there is possibility of tampering the witnesses and hampering the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
24.01.2023 rpp
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
rpp 24.01.2023