G. Muthuvelpandian v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Fourth day of August Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.13812 of 2016 G.MUTHUVELPANDIAN ..PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs.

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHATHIRAKUDI POLICE STATION, RAMNAD DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO. 100 OF 2016) ..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.A.S.VAIGUNTH Advocate For Respondent : Mr.P.KANNITHEVAN, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner is arrayed as sole accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.07.2016 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 417, 294(b), 306 and 511 IPC, in Crime No.100 of 2016, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant were in love with each other. The petitioner promised to marry the defacto complainant. Subsequently, the petitioner arranged marriage with another girl. When the defacto complainant questioned the petitioner and demanded to marry her, the petitioner abused and threatened the defacto complainant to go and die and abetted her to commit suicide. On complaint, a case has been registered for the above said offences.

3.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner never loved the defacto complainant. Only the defacto complainant loved him and whenever she proposes, the petitioner refused the same. The petitioner is not responsible for the act of the defacto complainant to attempt suicide. The petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that both the petitioner and the defacto complainant were in love and subsequently the petitioner refused to marry her and abetted her to commit suicide. Investigation is pending. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he will tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation.

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

5.Considering the serious nature of allegations against the petitioner and the investigation is pending, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence, this petition is dismissed.

sd/- 04/08/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHATHIRAKUDI POLICE STATION, RAMNAD DISTRICT.

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

3 THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, DISTRICT JAIL, RAMANATHAPURAM. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.13812 of 2016 Date :04/08/2016 PBK/SK-SKN/SAR-I 22/08/2016 ::2P-4C::

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