Amuthavel v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twentieth day of November Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.21904 of 2015 AMUTHAVEL ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED No.6 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DINDIGUL TOWN POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT (CRIME NO.1085 OF 2015) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S K.MANIKANDAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as 6th accused, in Crime No.1085 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, was arrested on 22.09.2015 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 341 and 302 of I.P.C., and hence, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 21.09.2015 at 11.50 a.m, near Dindigul Union Office, the petitioner and others assembled unlawfully with deadly weapons and restrained the deceased Raja @ Jesuraja, who came to the Court for appearing in a case and the fifth accused restrained his wife and accused Nos.A1 to A4 cut him with knife all over the body and caused his death and threatened the witnesses with dire consequences.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 22.09.2015 and there is no specific overt act attributed to the petitioner. The petitioner had already filed a bail petition in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.21232 of 2015. This Court dismissed the said petition on 05.11.2015.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that other accused are still in custody and the petitioner restrained the father and the wife of the deceased from securing the deceased and if the petitioner is released on bail, there is a possibility of tampering the witnesses.
5. By the order dated 05.11.2015, the earlier petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court. In the present petition, the petitioner submitted that he is the sole breadwinner of his family and he is in custody from 22.09.2015.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
6. Considering the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 22.09.2015 and also considering the fact that he is the sole breadwinner of his family, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.2, Dindigul and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily twice i.e at 10.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m until further orders.
sd/- 20/11/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.2 DINDIGUL 2 DO THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE DINDIGUL DISTRICT 3 THE OFFICER INCHARGE SUB JAIL DINDIGUL .
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DINDIGUL TOWN POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT 5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT MADURAI +1. CC to M/S K.MANIKANDAN Advocate SR.No.66434.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.21904 of 2015 Date :20/11/2015 AM/GSV.PM/SAR-II/20.11.2015/2P/7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/