M.Prakash v. Inspector Of Police

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.09.2022 for the alleged offence under Section 363 I.P.C. and subsequently altered into Sec.363 r/w 302 I.P.C. in Crime No.193 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of prosecution is that the petitioner claimed to be a Manager working under the deceased, who was a financier and out of dispute over money transaction, the petitioner at the instigation engaged the other accused and alleged to have kidnapped him in a vehicle on demand of ransom to a secluded place and when the demand was not fulfilled, they alleged to have attacked him to death. Hence, the complaint was registered against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that he was the Manager of deceased Gowthaman, who was doing finance business

and the business was lost due to his conduct and the petitioner has not swindled any money from him and the deceased also not lodged any complaint for misappropriation of account. He would submit that the petitioner was roped in this case only because he was employee of deceased. He would submit that he is no way connected with the offence. He would submit that he has not at all committed any of offence as alleged by the respondent police and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he will abide by any condition imposed by this court. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration from 23.09.2022. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that totally, there are 12 accused involved in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as A10. The role of this petitioner is that he is one of the assailant in the occurrence and he also attacked the deceased. He would submit that all other accused were arrested and they are still in judicial custody. He would submit that that if he is released on

bail, he would tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation and the investigation is almost completed. 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 and also considering gravity of offence committed by the petitioner, a detailed investigation is required in this case 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. 21.12.2022 rpp

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

rpp 21.12.2022