Sankar v. State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.9379 of 2024 T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 02.03.2024 in connection with Crime No.100 of 2024 registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 294(b), 352, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, seek bail.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners are none other than the brothers of the de facto complainant. He also conceded that there exists a property dispute between the petitioners and the de facto complainant, thereby, there occurs a frequent quarrel between them. He further submitted that on the date of occurrence i.e. on 01.03.2024, the victim, who is the wife of the de facto complainant, has removed the motor pump from the agricultural land, therefore, the petitioners have complained to the respondent Police and the respondent has also warned her. He further submitted that the petitioners have not abetted the victim to commit suicide, whereas, the de-facto complainant has lodged a false complaint as against

the petitioner, as if the petitioners have abused and threatened her. He further submitted that the petitioners are suffering incarceration from 02.03.2024 and they are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court, hence he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioners.

3. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police raised objection for granting bail to the petitioners stating that it is the case where the accused, who are the brothers and sisters of the de facto complainant, due to the property dispute, have abused and threatened the de facto complainant's wife and abetted her to commit suicide, thereby, on account of the frustration and humiliation caused by the accused, the victim had committed suicide by self immolation. He further submitted that investigation in this case is still pending, hence, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioners.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) that the investigation in this case is not yet completed and also considering the nature and the gravity of the offence committed by the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 17.04.2024 ham

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

ham Crl.O.P.No.9379 of 2024 17.04.2024