Viji @ Vijayakumar v. State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Sixteenth day of March Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Dr Justice G. JAYACHANDRAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.6073 of 2022 VIJI @ VIJAYAKUMAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VILLUPURAM TALUK POLICE STATION, VILLUPURAM DISTRICT (CRIME NO.42/2022) For Petitioner : M/S M.PRAKASH Advocate For Respondent : Mrs.G.V.KASTHURI, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.01.2022 at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Section 294(b), 341, 323, 427, 506(ii), r/w. sec. 4 of TNWH Act @ 294(b), 341, 352, 392, 506(ii) of IPC, r/w. Sec.3 of TNPPDL Act and 4 of TNPWH Act, in Crime No. 42 of 2022 seeks bail.
2. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police.
3. It is a case where, the wife of the petitioner has approached the respondent police reporting that, the petitioner along with other accused by name Meenakshi with a rowdy element, threatened the defacto complainant's husband and robbed his pension money. When the defacto complainant came to know about that, she advised her
husband not to give the money to the accused persons any further, due to which the accused persons wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and her husband while they were coming in a two wheeler. It is further alleged that the accused persons damaged the defacto complainant's two wheeler and threatened that if the defacto complainant stops paying the pension money to them, they have to face dire consequences.
4. The FIR also indicates that for several months, the pension money of the defacto complainant's husband has been robbed by this petitioner under the threat that, if he does not part away the money, their son Mutharasu, who is working as a Gate Keeper will be done away.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the investigation completed and final report is also filed. She further submits that one of the accused was already detained under Goondas and further if the petitioner released on bail, the witnesses will put under threat and the fair trial could not be conducted.
6. Considering the nature of the offence committed by the petitioner and the allegations made by the defacto complainant against the petitioner and further the in view of the fact that the petitioner is now been arrested for extorting the money putting the defacto complainant, her husband and their son under threat, if he released on bail, it will endanger the defacto complainant and his family. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 16/03/2022 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 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VILLUPURAM TALUK POLICE STATION, VILLUPURAM DISTRICT.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
3 THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, CUDDALORE.
CC to M/S M.PRAKASH Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.6073/2022 Date :16/03/2022 RW 24/03/2022