Sushmitha v. State Rep By

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.02.2023 for the alleged offence under Section 302 of I.P.C. and subsequently it was altered into Sec.147, 148, 302 r/w 120(B) of I.P.C. in Crime No.70 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that one Ragavi was married to one Vasanth/A3 two years ago and she developed illegal relationship with her school friend viz., Sudhasandar and eloped with him two months back. On 30.01.2023 at about 8.20 p.m. while she was travelling in a two wheeler with the deceased near Murugan Temple at Kalpalayam junction, Villivakkam Road, brother of her and her aunt's son came down from an auto and brutally attacked deceased by using knife and they escaped from the scene of occurrence, thereby he sustained serious injuries and died. Hence, the complaint was registered against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that based on the confession statement, she was implicated as accused in this case and she is none other than sister of A3. He would submit that she is an innocent person and she has not at all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police and she is no way connected with the said occurrence. He would submit that there is no role of the petitioner in the alleged offence and she has been falsely implicated as accused in this case. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 29 days from 01.02.2023. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that totally, there are 7 accused involved in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as A7. He would submit that A3's wife one Ragavi having affair with deceased, she eloped with him, due to which, the petitioner along with her husband attacked him with knife, thereby he sustained serious injuries 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 petitioner.

5. 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 the fact that investigation is still pending and if she is released on bail, she may abscond and 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.

01.03.2023 rpp

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

rpp 01.03.2023