Kalimuthu v. State Rep. By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the First day of November Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION Nos.20199 & 20306 of 2021 KALIMUTHU [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED IN CRL.O.P.No.20199/2021 ] 1 ESWARAMOORTHY 2 SELVAKUMAR 3 KARTHI [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED IN CRL.O.P.No.20306/2021 ] Vs STATE REP. BY [ RESPONDENT IN BOTH THE PETITIONS] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DHARAPURAM POLICE STATION, TIRUPPUR DISTRICT.
(CRIME NO. 1201 OF 2021) For Petitioner : M/S. C.S.SARAVANAN Advocate [IN BOTH THE PETITIONS] For Respondent : MR. A.GOPINATH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) [IN BOTH THE PETITIONS] PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who were arrested on 23.09.2021 and remanded to judicial custody for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 302, 307 of IPC in Crime No.1201 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.
2. Totally there are 5 accused persons involved in this case and the petitioners are arrayed as A1, A2, A3 and A5. The case of the prosecution is that the first accused was married the daughter of the deceased. Subsequently, both of them had divorce. Further, the first accused married another women and the daughter of the deceased married another person. Thereafter, there was a previous enmity, the petitioners along with other accused person had attacked the defacto complainant and his father and one Murugan with Aruval, due to which, the father of the defacto complainant died. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are no way connected with the alleged offence and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that there was a previous enmity, the petitioners along with other accused person had attacked the defacto complainant and his father and one Murugan with Aruval, due to which, the father of the defacto complainant died. He further submitted that there is one previous case pending against the petitioners. He also further submitted that the investigation is at initial stage. He further submitted that if the petitioners were released on bail, there is no progress in the trial. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioners.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the petitioners along with other accused persons had murdered the deceased and the investigation is at initial stage and there is one previous case pending against the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petitions are dismissed. -sd/- 01/11/2021 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, DHARAPURAM POLICE STATION, TIRUPPUR DISTRICT.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
3 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, COIMBATORE.
CC to M/S. C.S.SARAVANAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.Nos.20199 & 20306 of 2021 Date :01/11/2021 RW 19/11/2021