Anthony Raj, v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Twenty Second day of July Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.12446 of 2016 ANTHONY RAJ ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED RANK NOW KNOWN Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUNELVELI TALUK POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO.125 OF 2016) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S A.THIRUVADI KUMAR Advocate For Respondent : M/S.P.KANNITHEVAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for an alleged offence punishable under Sections 364,302 of I.P.C. @ 364, 302 and 120(B) of IPC in Crime No. 125 of 2016, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the wife of the deceased Janaki had illicit relationship with one Sakthivel. She got red handed in compromising position with Sakthivel. Panchayat was held and after that the wife of the deceased left the deceased and started living with said Sakthivel/A1. The petitioner, who is the mother of Janaki, informed her that the deceased was planned to murder the wife of the deceased and said Sakthivel and therefore, petitioner instigated other accused to murder the deceased. All the accused conspired together and murdered the deceased on 20.4.2016. on complaint, initially case has been registered under Sections 364 and 302 of I.P.C.and subsequently, it was altered into under sections 364, 302 and 120B of I.P.C.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and his name has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is improbable and the petitioner is the first graduate in his family and completed his M.Sc., and cleared CRPF examination and had been selected. He further contended that in order to ruin the entire career of the petitioner, a false case has been foisted against the petitioner and prays for granting anticipatory bail in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

favour of the petitioner. It is further contended that the petitioner has sent representation on 07.06.2016 to the Superintendent of Police with regard to conduct of enquiry and prays for granting anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that th petitioner in Crl.O.P(MD)No. 8440 of 2016 and the petitioner herein conspired together and committed murder of the deceased and the above said Crl.O.P(MD).No. 8440 of 2016 was dismissed by this Court on 10.6.2016 and the investigation of the case is pending and prayed for dismissal of this petition.

5. Considering the serious nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 22/07/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUNELVELI TALUK POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI trp JA-SKS-RR/29.7.2016/2P:3C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.12446 of 2016 Date :22/07/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/