Manikanda Prabhu v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Thirteenth day of July Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice A.M.BASHEER AHAMED CRL OP(MD) No.8913 of 2017 MANIKANDA PRABHU ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4 Vs THE STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THOOTHUKUDI NORTH POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.
CRIME NO. 213/2017 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.M.JEGADEESH PANDIAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.RAMAR, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.
ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.05.2017, for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 364(A) and 120(B) of IPC., in Crime No.213 of 2017, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the victim was abducted by the accused in this case for ransom of Rs.10,00,000/- and the defacto complainant, who is the son of the victim, was directed to bring the amount to a particular spot and on seeing the Police, the accused ran away from the place and the father of the defacto complainant was secured.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the allegation levelled against the petitioner is a false and the same is motivated one and based on the confession of the co-accused, the petitioner herein is implicated in this case.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent, on instructions, would submit that FIR was registered against unnamed persons in this case, on the basis of the complaint given by the son of the victim. The victim was abducted by the accused in this case for ransom of Rs.10,00,000/- and the defacto complainant was directed to bring the amount to a particular spot and on seeing the Police, the accused ran away from the place and the father of the defacto complainant was secured. He would further https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
submit that the petitioner herein surrendered before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai and he is in custody from 23.05.2017 onwards, and thereafter, he was taken into police custody, for interrogation and during interrogation the remaining accused are implicated in this case. A1, A2, A5 and A6 were granted bail by the concerned Sessions Court and A3 is in judicial custody. He also submitted that the petitioner is having three previous cases, including the offence under Sections 302 and 307 IPC. Cases.
5. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the bad antecedents of the petitioner in previous cases, including the offences under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC., cases, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, at this stage, and hence, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.
sd/- 13/07/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THOOTHUKUDI NORTH POLICE STATION,THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT. 2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
3 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PALAYAMKOTTAI.
MPK CSL/CM-MSA/SAR-I/18.07.2017 : 2P/4C
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.8913 of 2017 Date :13/07/2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/