Vijayabalaji v. Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Seventeenth day of June Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.14010 of 2022 1 VIJAYABALAJI [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED ] 2 NIRMALKUMAR Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE [ RESPONDENT ] MANGALAM POLICE STATION, TIRUPPUR DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO. 111 OF 2022) For Petitioner : M/S.N.PONRAJ Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.DAMODARAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.04.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 323, 324, 302 and 201 of IPC in crime No.111 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and her elder brother by name Rajkumar are the residents of Uttar Pradesh. It is alleged that the defacto complainant and one, his brother came to Palladam in search of job. In Palladam, on 07.04.2022, they met one Rajesh(A1) who is running M/s.Perfect Labour Solution India Private Limited. In the said place, the said Rajesh and three others asked them to go immediately to Namakkal for getting employment but when the defacto complainant and his brother refused to go immediately stating that they were tired of travelling from Uttar Pradesh to Palladam and informed that they would go tomorrow. While so, it is further alleged that on hearing the reply from the defacto complainant and his brother, the said Rajesh and three others including petitioners got angry and took away the mobile phone from the brother of defacto complainant and when the same was questioned, it is alleged that the said Rajesh and others beaten up the defacto

complainant and his brother as a result of which the brother of defacto complainant fainted. Thereafter, they got the defacto complainant to a lonely place in the midnight and then, the defacto complainant gave the complaint. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioners.

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that the accused persons beat the defacto complainant and his brother for the reason that they refused to go for work as they were tired of travelling from Uttar Pradesh to Palladam. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.

5. There are totally four accused. The deceased and his brother of Uttar Pradesh came to work with the instigation of A1, who is a broker who arranges job for people coming from North India. The deceased and the defacto complainant came from Uttar Pradesh and wanted to take rest for one day and informed that they will go to work next day, for which the petitioner along with other accused persons assaulted them with hands, legs and belt. A1 was arrested, whereas these petitioners are arrayed as A2 and A3. The specific overt act is that A2 assaulted with belt and A3 with hands and legs, in which the defacto complainant also sustained injury and the deceased fainted. Thereafter, the accused persons threw the deceased in a lonely place in the mid night. On the complaint made by the public, the case was registered.

Therefore, the petitioner along with other accused persons brutally murdered the deceased and also attacked the defacto complainant, who sustained grievous injuries. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 17/06/2022 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 INSPECTOR OF POLICE MANGALAM POLICE STATION, TIRUPPUR DISTRICT.

2 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, SUB JAIL, TIRUPPUR.

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.N.PONRAJ Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.14010/2022 Date :17/06/2022 CSK 24/06/2022