Ramesh v. State Rep By

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 306, 304(2) IPC r/w 135(1)(a) and 135(1)(e) of the Electricity Act, 2003 in Crime No.156 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the deceased was separated from her husband and living in her parental house. The deceased is said to have illicit relationship with the petitioner and they used to have sexual intercourse. On the date of occurrence, they had physical relationship in a maize field and on seeing a passer-by, they tried to hide themselves in the field, however, deceased got contacted with the electrical fence which was erected by one Ramasamy to prevent the rats from spoiling his cultivation and she died. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged. He would also submit that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that there was an illicit relationship between the petitioner and the deceased for a long time. While so, on 28.09.2022, the petitioner has called the deceased over phone and the deceased has also went to maize field. At that time, they had physical relationship and on seeing the passer-by, the deceased tried to hide in the field of one Ramasamy. At that time, the deceased had died due to her contact with electrical fence, which was illegally erected by the said Ramasamy. However, the petitioner left the scene of occurrence. He has also produced a copy of the alteration report dated 29.09.2022. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.Heard both sides and perused the materials including the alteration report. A perusal of the alteration report, reveals that the petitioner was present in the scene of occurrence, but he left from there. 6.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the petitioner was present in the scene of occurrence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 16.12.2022 sp

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

sp 16.12.2022