Kannan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Fifth day of December Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.16455 of 2017 KANNAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.6 Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALLIDAIKURICHI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.199 OF 2017 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.S.R.A.RAMACHANDHRAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.K.ANBARASAN, Government 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 the offences punishable under Sections 147,148,294(b), 341, 302, 120(B) I.P.C., in Crime No.199 of 2017, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that Accused nos.1 and 2 are the sons of the petitioner/A6 herein. Earlier, accused no.1 involved murder case of one Ravichandran. In order to wreck Vengeance, the petitioner/A6's sons viz., accused nos.

1 and 2 attacked one Sakthivelmurugan with the help of other accused persons and the petitioner/A6 gave information to his son to commit murder of one Sakthivelmurugan. After committing the murder, the same was informed to the parents and they ran away from the scene of occurrence. Thereby, the Law Enforcing Agency registered a case against the petitioner/A6 and other accused persons.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution. There was no specific overtact against this petitioner. Based on the confession given by the accused no.2, the petitioner herein was implicated in the false case as alleged by the prosecution.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the State, has produced the confession statement given by the accused no.2 and on perusal of the confession statement, a specific overtact against the petitioner herein, wherein, the petitioner informed the movement of the deceased person to his son. Based on the information given by the petitioner herein, his son brutally attacked the deceased person, thereby, the said Sakthivelmurugan died on the spot.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) and also considering the gravity of offence committed by the petitioner/A6 and other accused, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner herein. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail is dismissed.

sd/- 05/12/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALLIDAIKURICHI POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.16455 of 2017 Date :05/12/2017 MS/CM-VR/SAR.1/13.12.2017/2P.3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/