Raghuraman v. State By

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.14054 of 2022 RAGHURAMAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAPPEDU POLICE STATION, TIRUVALLUR.

CRIME NO.103 OF 2022.

For Petitioner : M/S.S.KARTIK Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.DAMODARAN, Additional Public Prosecutor, PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13.04.2022 for the offences punishable under Section 302 of IPC in crime No.103 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased is the father of the petitioner. There was frequent quarrel between them due land dispute, for which the petitioner used to pick up quarrel with the deceased. On 13.04.2022 at about 06.30 a.m., when the petitioner demanded land in his name, for which the deceased refused and due to that, the petitioner pushed him down and assaulted him with iron pipe over his head. On 13.04.2022, the petitioner informed to the defacto complainant that their father fell down. When the defacto complainant rushed there and saw that their father fell unconscious and thereafter he was admitted in Sriperumbudur Government Hospital and thereafter shifted to Chengalpet Government Hospital, where he was declared dead. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was living with his father and he was the one taking care https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

of his deceased father. He would further submit that it is the petitioner's sister, who frequently disturbed the father regarding the land, has given the false complaint. He would further submit that the petitioner only informed his sister and took his father to the hospital. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that on the occurrence day, the petitioner had attacked his father on his head, thereby he sustained injuries. Thereafter, he was taken to Sriperumbudur Government Hospital and thereafter shifted to Chengalpet Government Hospital, where he was declared dead. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. The deceased is the father of the petitioner. Due to land dispute, the petitioner assaulted him with iron pipe, thereby he fell down. The petitioner being the son of the deceased, killed his own father attacking with iron rod on his head. Though the petitioner had taken him to hospital, he is the person who attacked the deceased on his head, thereby he sustained grievous injuries and died. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 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, MAPPEDU POLICE STATION, TIRUVALLUR.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL, CHENNAI.

CC to M/S.S.KARTIK Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.14054/2022 Date :17/06/2022 TA-24/06/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/