Arunprabu v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twelfth day of March Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) Nos.4144 & 4149 of 2015 ARUNPRABU ... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED IN CRL.OP(MD)NO.4144/15 NALLAKANNU @ KUTHIRAI NALLAKANNU ...PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED IN CRL.OP(MD)NO.4149/15 Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PANAGUDI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

CR.NO.71/2015 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT IN BOTH PETITIONS For Petitioner : MR.R.ANAND, FOR M/S.V.MAHARAJAN Advocate IN BOTH PETITIONS For Respondent : MR.A.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) IN BOTH PETITIONS PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4144 of 2015, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 302 and 120(b) IPC in Crime No.71 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4149 of 2015, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 302 and 120(b) IPC in Crime No.71 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

3. It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased Davidraja is an Engineering College student and there was enmity between him and A-1 to A-7 named in the First Information Report. The defacto complainant is the father of the deceased. On 20.02.2015, A-1 to A-7 attacked the deceased when he was going to College and committed this murder. The eye witness in this case is the father of the deceased, on whose complaint, a case in Crime No.71 of 2015 was registered against A-1 to A-7. The police arrested A-1 to A-7. According to the defacto complainant, A-1 to A-7 were nurturing a grudge against the deceased for over several years. On 26.02.2015, one Murugan, who is the father of Arunprabu-the petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4144 of 2015, surrendered before the Village Administrative Officer and gave a confession to the effect that the deceased was harassing his daughter, which was not to his liking and,

therefore, he had contacted A-1 to A-7 knowing that they were also having a grudge against the deceased and requested them to commit the murder of the deceased. In the confession of Murugan, he has stated that he would finance A-1 to A-7, if they do away with the deceased. Murugan was arrested on 26.02.2015.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that Arunprabu, who is the son of Murugan, and Nallakannu @ Kuthirai Nallakannu, who is the brother-in-law of Murugan, are being implicated for the first time through the confession statement of Murugan and, therefore, the police are setting up a case that is different from the case that was proffered by the defacto complainant. Therefore, this Court called for the case diary and perused the same.

5. On going through the case diary, this Court found that the name of Arunprabu-the petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4144 of 2015, who is the son of Murugan, surfaced even in the confession statement of A-1. Therefore, it cannot be stated that Arunprabu is being falsely implicated subsequently. Since allegations against Arunprabu are indeed very serious, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to him and, therefore, Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4144 of 2015 is dismissed.

6. As regards the case of Nallakannu @ Kuthirai Nallakannu, who is the petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4149 of 2015, his name surfaced only after the arrest of Murugan and there also, it is merely stated that he was present with Murugan. His involvement has not been stated by any of the accused, who were arrested earlier.

7. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to Nallakannu @ Kuthirai Nallakannuthe petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4149 of 2015.

8. Accordingly, Nallakannu @ Kuthirai Nallakannu- the petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4149 of 2015 is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Valliyur, Tirunelveli District, on condition that he shall execute 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[a] He shall report before the respondent police daily at 06.30 p.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

[b] He shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[c] He shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [d] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against him in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and he released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

[e] The Inspector of Police concerned is directed to send a compliance report to the Office of the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side), whether he is complying with the order or not. sd/- 12/03/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VALLIYOOR, TIRUNELVELI.

2.

-DO- THRO THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNELVELI.

3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PANAGUDI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

4. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S.V.MAHARAJAN Advocate SR.No. 11923 SR : 13.03.2015 : 3P/6C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) Nos.4144 & 4149 of 2015 Date :12/03/2015