Natarajan v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Ninth day of August Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.14148 of 2016 NATARAJAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE AMMAYANAICKANUR POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.
(IN CRIME NO. 102 OF 2014) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S M.KAMATCHI Advocate For Respondent : MR.P.KANNITHEVAN 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 accused was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 17.06.2016 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147,148,341,307 of IPC r/w. 3,4 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 in Crime No.102 of 2014, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 16.06.2016 while the defacto complainant patrolling the duty on highways, the petitioner along with other accused persons unlawfully assembled with deadly weapons and restrained the accused of a murder case of Pasupathi Pandian in order to wreck vengeance and also with an intention to commit murder of the accused Subash Pannaiyar and others and threw explosives on them and when the police tried to catch them, they escaped and thereby committed the above said offences.
3. The case of the petitioner is 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 petitioner is in judicial custody from 17.06.2016 and prays for enlarging the petitioner on bail. 4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) submitted that the petitioner along with other accused unlawfully assembled and thrown the petrol bombs and murder the accused involved in other cases and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
he has involved in other cases in the similar nature of offences and he is a habitual offender. If he is enlarged on bail he will abscond and tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation and prays for dismissal of this petition.
5.Considering the serious nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner and he is a habitual offender, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 09/08/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TRP TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,AMMAYANAICKANUR POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.
2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 3 THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S M.KAMATCHI Advocate SR.No.43207 GJM/NGM/MP/SAR-III-12.8.16-2P-5C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.14148 of 2016 Date :09/08/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/