M.Senthil v. The Deputy Superintendent Of

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Eighth day of June Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.10018 of 2015 M.SENTHIL ... PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED Vs STATE REP.BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBCID, TIRUNELVELI. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MR.V.KATHIRVELU, Senior Counsel for M/S.J.MANICKAM Advocate For Respondent : MR.C.RAMACHANDRAN,Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody by the respondent police on 05.04.2015 for the alleged offence under Sections 120B, 306 IPC and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in Crime No.1 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the deceased was working as an Assistant Executive Engineer in the Agricultural Department at Tirunelveli and the accused persons have demanded bribe of Rs12.25 lakhs for appointment of seven drivers and due to the torture given by the accused persons, he committed suicide by jumping in front of the moving train on 02.02.2015 at 12.30 hours.

3.Mr.V.Kathirvelu, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire investigation is over and the main accused/A1 in this case was already granted bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.9426 of 2015, dated 03.06.2015.

4.Mr.C.Ramachandran, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is not similarly placed person that of the first accused and the petitioner had often threatened the deceased over cell https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ phone demanding bribe and the respondent police have recovered three

cell phones and out of three cell phones, two cell phones were recovered from the first accused and one cell phone is recovered from the petitioner. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that the report of the forensic lab is awaited and some of the witnesses are sub-ordinate officers of the petitioner and if he is granted bail, there is every possibility of tampering the witnesses. 5.However, considering the period of incarceration by the petitioner and also considering the fact that the prima accused/A1 was already released on bail by this court and the stage of the investigation, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail on the following conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.

10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tirunelveli, and on further condition that the petitioner shall stay at Chennai and report before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBCID, Metro Wing II, Chennai, daily at 10.00 a.m until further orders.

6.The petitioner shall not interfere with the investigation or tamper the witness. In the event of any violation of the above conditions, the respondent/Police is at liberty to move application for cancellation of bail.

sd/- 08/06/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I,TIRUNELVELI. 2 DO-THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,TIRUNELVELI. 3 THE SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL PRISON,PALAYAMKOTTAI. 4 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBCID, TIRUNELVELI. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,CBCID,METRO WING II,CHENNAI. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.J.MANICKAM Advocate SR.No.28408

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10018 of 2015 Date :08/06/2015 PA/08.06.2015/2P/8C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/