Kattapomman @ Kalaki v. The State Rep By

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.05.2024 for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 307, ) of I.P.C. r/w 25(1)(b) of Arms Act in Crime No. 149 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 27.05.2024 around 08.00 hrs., when the defacto complainant was going nearby Keezhaiyur bridge, at that time, the petitioner along with other accused, who are well acquainted with him, waylaid the defacto complainant, scolded him in filthy language, threatened him using knife and said to have indulged in extorting money from him and also criminal intimidated him. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has been falsely implicated in this case as if he along with other accused extorted

money from the defacto complainant. In fact, there is no specific overtact against the petitioner and he is no way connected with the case. He would submit that he has not at all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police and he was not present at the scene of occurrence. He would submit that the investigation is almost completed and he would abide by any condition that may be imposed by this court and he is in judicial custody from 27.05.2024 for more than 49 days. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that the petitioner is arrayed as sole accused and the petitioner along with other accused extorted money from the defacto complainant. He would submit that 5 previous cases pending against him. He would submit that if he is released on bail, he would tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the

submissions made by both counsel, considering the gravity of offence committed by the petitioner by extorting money from the defacto complainant and the fact that there are 5 previous cases pending against him and he is an habitual offender and also the fact that investigation is still pending and if he is released on bail, he may abscond and there is possibility of tampering the witnesses and hampering the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

15.07.2024 rpp

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

rpp 15.07.2024