Madras High CourtCRL OP/10413/2024dismissed

Rishi S v. State Rep By

2024-07-03Honourable Mr Justice C.V. Karthikeyan3 pages

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

The petitioner/A2, in Crime No.707 of 2023 registered by the respondent police originally under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. and later altered to Section 306 IPC. A1 and A2 are father and son. A3 and A4 are Civil Engineers employed with a Company by name Ocean Life Spaces India Private Limited, Chennai, who had developed contact with the first and second accused owing to the electrical contract business run by the first accused.

It is the case of the prosecution that according to the defacto complainant/wife of the deceased, her husband had been called for an enquiry by all the accused persons, who had gone over to their house regarding an alleged theft in the premises of the first and second accused. It is stated that thereafter, he had come home in a dejected state of mind and had committed suicide. It is also stated that there were injuries on her husband. 3.

This Court had consistantly dismissed the anticipatory bail of the petitioner, but however, the respondent, for reasons best known, had not taken the petitioner into consideration. Therefore, this Court had directed the Inspector of Police, M.3 Puzhal Police Station, Chennai to be present in Court. The Inspector is present, but no details have been given as to the steps 1/3

taken to secure the petitioner. The investigation has been completed and final report has been filed. In the final report, the petitioner has been shown as an absconding accused. Naturally, this Court cannot grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petitioner will have to surrender before the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Madhavaram. If he does so and if at all the learned Magistrate is of the opinion that he can be released, then a condition of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Only) has to be imposed on the petitioner to be paid to the defacto complainant. This is not a direction. The Magistrate is also at liberty to remand the petitioner. 4.

Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

03.07.2024 gsa 2/3

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

gsa 03.07.2024 3/3