Ravi v. The State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Sixth day of June Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.10628 of 2022 1 RAVI [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 K.PRABHU Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHITHAMUR POLICE STATION, CHENGALPET DISTRICT.
CRIME NO.61 OF 2022.
For Petitioner : M/S. J.SURESH Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.DAMODARAN, Additional Public Prosecutor, PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 306 of IPC, in Crime No.61 of 2022, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that due to altercation between one Ellappan and the defacto complainant family, the said Ellappan died for which, the petitioners and others conducted Panchayat and unanimously decided that the defacto complainant family has to pay a compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- to the deceased family. Since the defacto complainant filed to arrange the compensation, the Pachayatars decided to ostracized the defacto complainant family, due to which, the defacto complainant's father committed suicide by hanging. Hence the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and no way connected with the alleged offence. He would further submit that the petitioners are only the attendees in the said panchayat and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioners conducted panchayat and unanimously took decision due to which, the deceased committed suicide. He further submitted that the investigation is not yet completed and if the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail, there is a possibility that they will tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Taking into consideration the nature allegations also and the fact that the case is in the initial stage of the investigation and that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is essential, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 06/06/2022 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 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHITHAMUR POLICE STATION, CHENGALPET DISTRICT.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S. J.SURESH Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.10628/2022 Date :06/06/2022 TA-13/06/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/