Balamurugan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Fifteenth day of April Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.CHOCKALINGAM CRL OP(MD) No.6375 of 2016 BALAMURUGAN ... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARIMEDU POLICE STATION, MADURAI CITY, CRIME NO. 145 OF 2016. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT FOR PETITIONER : M/S R.SENTHIL KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT : MR.K.V.RAJARAJAN, GOVT. 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 and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.03.2016 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 304(B) and 306 of IPC in Crime No.145 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has not involved in any of the offences. He would further submit that previously the case was registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C and subsequently after filing of the Revenue Divisional Officer's report, the case was altered into Sections 304(B) and 306 of IPC and the petitioners have not committed any offence and the defacto complainant is the mother of the deceased and she lodged the false complaint to harass the petitioner. The petitioner is ready to produce substantial sureties as directed by this Court and the petitioner has been in judicial custody from 01.03.2016 and he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that investigation is pending and if the petitioner is released on bail, he will tamper and hamper the witnesses. He prayed for dismissal of this petition.

4. In this case, the learned counsel produced a typed set of papers. It is seen that the accused demanded dowry and harassed the deceased. As per the enquiry report, the death of the deceased would be caused due to dowry harassment.

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

5. In view of the above circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail at this stage. Hence, this petition is dismissed. sd/- 15/04/2016 / TRUE COPY / Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARIMEDU POLICE STATION, MADURAI CITY.

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

3. THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.6375 of 2016 Date :15/04/2016 CM TE/SKS-RR/AR-I : 25/04/2016 : 2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/