Mohan Raj v. The State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 17.07.2020 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.10659 of 2020 Mohan Raj ... Petitioner Vs.
The State rep. by ... Respondent The Inspector of Police Melmaruvathur Police Station Kancheepuram District (Crime No.819 of 2020) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.819 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Magesh Kumar For Respondent : Mr.T.Shunmugarajeswaran Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.05.2020 for the offences punishable under Section 294 (b), 323, 302 IPC r/w Section 4 of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, in Crime No.819 of 2020, seeks bail. 2.The case of the prosecution as per the de-facto complainant is that on 29.05.2020, there was a wordy quarrel between her family members and the accused due to burning of garbage and on the same day at 7.00 p.m. the petitioner along with others came to the house of the defacto complainant and started a quarrel again, abused and assaulted the defacto complainant and her husband. Due to the same, the defacto complainant's husband had fallen down and sustained injury and died.
3.The learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was arrested on 30.05.2020. He would further submit that the petitioner is the neighbour of the defacto complainant and that there was a wordy quarrel due to burning of
garbage behind the house and during the quarrel, there was a scuffle and that the defacto complainant's husband fallen down and sustained injuries and he was taken to hospital, where he was declared brought dead. He would further submit that absolutely there was no motive or intention to commit the murder and the incident had occurred only during the scuffle and there is no weapon used. He would further submit that the petitioner is prepared to comply with any stringent condition imposed by the Court and he is prepared to stay away. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are neighbours and that on 25.05.2020, there was a quarrel between the accused persons and the family members of the defacto complainant. During the quarrel, the accused persons have fisted and assaulted the defacto complainant and her husband with the hands and the same resulted in death of the defacto complainant's husband. He would further submit that the investigation is pending.
5.Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstance of this case and also considering the fact that the petitioner is in jail from 30.05.2020, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the Petitioners subject to the following conditions:- (a)Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing his own bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), before the Superintendent of the concerned prison, in which the petitioner has been confined and thereafter on his release;
(b) Thereafter, the petitioner shall execute two sureties for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurantakam, within a period of two weeks after lifting of lockdown or the commencement of the Court's normal functioning whichever is earlier, failing which the bail granted by this Court shall stand dismissed automatically; (c) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;
(d) the petitioner shall stay at Tindivanam and report before the Tindivanam town police station everyday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of one week and thereafter on every Monday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders, the petitioner shall not enter into the jurisdiction of the respondent police /limits. (e) the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature;
(f) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(g) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(h) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];
(i) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
6. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.
-sd/- 17/07/2020 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE MADURANTAKAM 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE CHENGALPATTU. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MELMARUVATHUR POLICE STATION, KANCHEEPURAM DISTRICT.
5 THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISONPUZHAL, CHENNAI.
CC to M/S. G.MAGESHKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.10659/2020 Date :17/07/2020 TA-25/08/2020