Kutti @ Rajendran v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Thirtieth day of March Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Dr Justice G. JAYACHANDRAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.7261 of 2022 1 KUTTI @ RAJENDRAN [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 RANGANATHAN Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF PO LICE, ANNUR POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO.68/2022) For Petitioner : M/S C.RAMKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : M/S.G.V.KASTHURI Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners herein are arrayed as A3 and A4. It is a case of murder of one Saravanan.

2. According to the prosecution, the deceased was a former employee of these petitioners, who were running a chit fund business. Four months prior to the incident, the deceased left the job and has started his own finance company, which has infuriated these petitioners and therefore, had threatened the deceased. This was informed by the deceased to his mother. On the date of occurrence, when the deceased went along with the defacto complainant, who is none other than his brother to meet the customers, two persons in an auto picked wordy quarrel with the deceased and later took out deadly weapon hidden in the auto and attacked the deceased causing more than 11 cut injuries all over the body. The multiple cut injuries has caused his instant death.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that these petitioners were not in the scene of crime and they are not instrumental for the murder of the deceased and only on suspicion, they were arrested on 28.01.2022. Since the investigation is almost completed and the petitioners are in prison for more than 60 days, these petitioners seek bail.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the murder was committed by hiring the killers to take vengeance against the deceased, who has started rival business and the threat was already intimated by the deceased to his mother and the attack was witnessed by the defacto complainant and the public. Further, one of the accused who has provided information about the movement of the deceased and the owner of the two wheeler, in which one of the assailant fled from the scene of occurrence after committing the crime is yet to be secured. Hence, she opposed granting of bail to the petitioners herein.

5. Considering the objection made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the nature of the offence and the stage of the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to these petitioners since the release of the petitioners will lead to distorting the evidence. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition for bail is dismissed.

-sd/- 30/03/2022 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 PO LICE, ANNUR POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE DISTRICT.

2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, COIMBATORE.

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

+1CC to M/S C.RAMKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.No.4884 CRL OP.7261/2022 Date :30/03/2022 CSK 31/03/2022