Ramanathan v. State By

T.V.THAMIILSELVI, J., The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 506(i) and 306 of IPC in Crime No.302 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to property dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant's husband, the petitioner abused the defacto complainant's husband and threatened him with dire consequences. Due to which, the defacto complainant's husband consumed pesticide and immediately he was admitted into the hospital and he died on 16.06.2024. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is no way connected with the

alleged confession statement of the husband of the defacto complainant. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent raised objection stating that the defacto complainant's husband borrowed a loan from the petitioner and for that, they gave property as a security and also they paid more than Rs.5 lakhs as interest. Even then, the petitioner refused to hand over the documents belongs to the defacto complainant. Further, he would threatened him with dire consequences and demanded money due to which, the husband of the defacto complainant consumed pesticides and committed suicide on 16.06.2024. He further submitted that investigation is also pending and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary in this case. Hence, he raised strong objection.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent and also perused the entire materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the both counsels and the petitioner is the only reason for committing the suicide of the husband of the defacto complainant since he claimed exorbitant interest from him and on considering the gravity of offence, detailed investigation is necessary in this case and this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 29.07.2024 ssi

T.V.THAMIILSELVI, J., ssi 29.07.2024