Rabindranathkar v. The State By

M. DHANDAPANI , J.

The petitioner, who was arrested on 13.11.2020 for the offences under Sections 120(b) r/w. 302, 450, 302 (3 counts), 380 r/w.34, 109 IPC and Sections 27(3), 29(B) & 30 of Arms Act, in Crime No.916 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that one Mrs.Jeyamala got married to one Mr.Sheetalkumar and they have two daughters. Subsequently, due to matrimonial dispute, the said Jeyamala left the matrimonial home and resided at her parental home at Maharashtra. Thereafter, the accused persons, who are the family members of the said Jeyamala demanded Rs.5 Crores as compensation from the husband's family. But the said Sheethalkumar and his parents refused to give the amount. Hence, the accused persons came to the house of the parents of Sheetalkumar on 11.11.2020 and demanded a sum of Rs.5 Crores. When they refused, they shot down all the three persons by using revolver. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner herein is arrayed as A6 in the criminal case and the petitioner is

only a Driver and he is no way related to the crime or the other accused. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner herein (A6) had no previous motive as against the deceased or other accused persons. Further, the petitioner is in incarceration for more than 22 months. Therefore, the learned counsel prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner herein (A6).

4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that, all the bail applications filed by the co-accused in Crl.O.P.Nos.19068 & 19071 of 2021, 12030 & 12084 of 2022 have been dismissed by this Court. He further submitted that, in Crl.O.P.Nos.12030 & 12084 of 2022, this Court has issued a direction to the trial Court to complete the trial in S.C.No.315 of 2021 within a period of six months. Therefore, the learned Government Advocate contended that, when such being the position, grant of bail to this petitioner (A6) would adversely affect the progress of trial, and hence, objected for grant of bail.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and

having regard to direction issued by this Court to complete the trial within a period of six months and that there is no change of circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 26.07.2022 mkn

M. DHANDAPANI , J.

mkn 26.07.2022