Rajkumar v. State Rep By

P.DHANABAL,J.

The petitioner/A6, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.07.2024 for the offences under Sections 332(a), 296, 103 and 351(3) of the BNS @ Sections 103, 191(2), 191(3), 296, 332(a), 351(3) and 61(2) of the BNS, 2023, in Crime No.394 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, due to previous enmity, the petitioner/A6 along with other accused assaulted the defacto complainant's son with a machete and iron rod. Due to this, he sustained grievous injuries and was admitted to the hospital, where he was declared brought dead by the doctors. Hence the complaint.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/A6 would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person, he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution, and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submitted that the petitioner was a friend and a distant relative of A1 and A2; that on the date of occurrence, he went to 1/4

the hotel along with A1 and A2 only. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 29.07.2024; that he is a law-abiding citizen; and that he is ready and willing to furnish substantial sureties for his due release on bail and to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and therefore, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that, due to previous enmity, the petitioner/A6 along with other accused assaulted the deceased with a machete and iron rod and that the CCTV footage is also available. He further submitted that the FIR was registered only on 27.07.2024; that the accused/petitioner was arrested only on 29.07.2024; and that the investigation is at an initial stage. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made by both sides, the 2/4

investigation is at an initial stage, and considering that the offences are grave in nature, this Court is declining to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 04.09.2024 dk Copy to 1.The Judicial Magistrate - I, Dharmapuri.

2. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Salem.

3.The Inspector of Police, Dharmapuri Town Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai - 600 104.

P.DHANABAL, J.

dk 3/4

04.09.2024 4/4