Venkatesan @ Mani v. State Rep.By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 27.07.2020 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.11018 of 2020 J.Venkatesan @ Mani ... Petitioner Vs.
State Represented By The Inspector of Police Thanipadi Police Station Tiruvannamalai District (Crime No.1604/2020) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.1604 of 2020 pending on the file of the Respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy For Respondent : Mr.T.Shunmugarajeswaran Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
O R D E R
(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.06.2020 for the offences punishable under Section 174 (1) Cr. P.C. @ 294 (b), 323, 302, 201 IPC; in Crime No.1604 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant Sathya is that her husband who was working in Bangalore, had come back to his native place and on 08.06.2020, her husband had gone out from the house with one person for playing cards. At that time, wordy quarrel arose between the husband of the defacto complainant and the accused persons. Again she had seen, her husband fighting with somebody. On the next day, he had gone out of the house and she received an information that her husband was found dead inside a well. Initially the case was registered under section 174 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, during enquiry it came to light that the defacto complainant's husband was pushed inside the well and he died, as a result of which, the offence was altered into Sections 294(b), 323, 302, 201 of IPC.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. On the earlier day, there was a quarrel between the accused persons and the deceased. Even as per the complaint no one has seen the occurrence and the the petitioner was implicated based on the confession statement recorded from the other accused. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that there was a wordy quarrel between the accused persons and the deceased, due to which, while playing cards, the accused had assaulted the deceased and pushed him inside a well resulting in the death of the deceased. He further submitted that investigation is pending. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.
5.Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances and the submissions made by the of the learned counsels and also considering the period of incarceration by the petitioners from 09.06.2020, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner 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) each, before the Superintendent of the concerned prison, in which the petitioner has been confined and thereafter on his release;
(b) the petitioner shall execute two sureties for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), before the Judicial Magistrate, Chengam, 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 Tiruvannamalai and report before the Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai Town Police Station, daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks and thereafter on every Monday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. (e) It is made clear that the petitioner shall not enter into the Jurisdictional limit of the Tanipadi Police station until further orders.
(f) the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature;
(g) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(h) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(i) 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];
(j) 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/- 27/07/2020 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, CHENGAM.
2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TIRUVANNAMALAI [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, VELLORE.
4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THANIPADI POLICE STATION, TIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.
6 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUVANNAMALAI TOWN POLICE STATION, TIRUVANNAMALAI.
CC to M/S. M.KRISHNAMOORTHY Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.11018/2020 Date :27/07/2020 MK:20/08/2020