Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/1783/2024dismissed

S.Sankar Ganesh v. The Inspector Of Police

2024-02-08Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Eighth day of February Two Thousand and Twenty Four PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI 1 S.SANKAR GANESH 2 K.DIVYA ... Petitioners / Accused Rank not known Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PARAMATHI POLICE STATION, KARUR-639111, (CRIME NO.30/2024) ... Respondent / Complainant For Petitioners :

M/s.G.V.Sridharan, Advocate For Respondent :

Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. PRAYER : FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN CRIME NO.30/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE RESPONDENT POLICE ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners/Accused Rank not known, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 364(A), 323, 452 1/4

and 506(2) of IPC in Crime No.30 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner borrowed a sum Rs.18,00,000/- from the defacto complainant and subsequently, the defacto complainant demanded the said amount and the same was refused by the first petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioners kidnapped the defacto complainant for committing murder. However, he narrowly escaped and lodged a complaint before the respondent police. Hence the case.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that all the Spas were closed before six months and the first petitioner is residing in Chennai along with the second petitioner and they did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the alleged kidnap was happened only on 23.01.2024 in Paramathi, Karur Distrtict. During such time, the first petitioner is in Chennai and it is impossible to kidnap the defacto complainant from Paramathi and hence, he prays for grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4.The Government Advocate (Crl. side) would submit that there are 14 accused involved in this case and the petitioners are arrayed as A1 and A2 and if the petitioners are released on anticipatory bail, there will be no progress in the investigation. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the 2/4

petitioners.

6.Considering the serious allegation made against the petitioners and also considering the fact that if the petitioners are released on anticipatory bail, there will be no progress in the investigation ,this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7.In the result, this petition is dismissed.

sd/- 08/02/2024 / TRUE COPY / /02/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. I / II / III /IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

SJI To 1.The Inspector of Police, K.Paramathi Police Station, Karur-639111.

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

ORDER

IN Date :08/02/2024 3/4

ED/ GS /SAR- (13/02/2024) 4P / 3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4