Manoharan @ Manohar v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 23/06/2022 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN

1. Manoharan @ Manohar

2. Sathappan @ Velli Sathappan

3. Balakrishnan @ Pugazh Class Balu

4. Kalayan Vellaisamy @ Vellaisamy

5. Thillan Sundar @ Sundaravadivel

6. Vapparan Subramani @ Periyakaruppan

7. Ramkumar

8. Veerasekar

9. Sarasu @ Saroja ... Petitioners/Accused 1 to 9 Vs 1.The State rep.by, The Sub Inspector of Police, K.Pudupatty Police Station, Pudukottai District.

Crime No.50 of 2022.

... Respondent/Complainant 2.Manikandan ... Petitioner/Intervener/ Defacto Complainant in Crl.MP(MD)No.6284 of 2022 For Petitioner : Mr.Senthilkumar R, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.A.Arul Jenifer PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C 1/3

PRAYER :- For Anticipatory bail in Crime No.50 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent Police ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 9, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Section 174 Cr.P.C., altered to Section 306 IPC in Crime No.50 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The learned counsel for the intervenor submits that because of the cheating of two women through the same husband, trouble has arisen between the two groups and one of the parties were insisting upon the other party not to use the name of Rasu, who is the husband. This caused frequent trouble between the parties. 3.He would further submit that when a peace committee meeting was arranged, in which the village people advised one of the parties not to use the name of Rasu, it caused some sort of depression in the mind of the deceased and in turn caused some sort of celebration in the mind of the accused persons. So, because of the aforesaid issue, the deceased got detected.

4.According to the learned counsel for the intervenor, the accused persons have used filthy language and because of the humiliation that has been meted out to the deceased by them, she committed suicide. Not satisfied with that, subsequently also, they transferred some of the messages through 'Whatsapp' making abusing and insulting words. So, on going through the evidence, it is seen that it is very unfortunate thing that such sort of attitude has been expressed by the accused persons.

5.However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned counsel for the intervenor submits that except A1, others may be considered for granting anticipatory bail, since they are facing trouble and threat at the instance of the 1st accused. 6.It appears that it is a genuine proposal that has been made by the learned counsel for the intervenor. So, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 2 to 9.

7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the petitioners 2 to 9 are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam, on condition that the petitioners 2 to 9 shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that 2/3

the petitioners 2 to 9 must stay away from Pudukottai and must stay at Trichy. The petitioners 2 to 9 shall appear before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Trichy, daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. The petitioners 2 to 9 shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. 8.The petitioners 2 to 9 shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. Insofar as the 1st petitioner is concerned, this petition is dismissed.

sd/- 23/06/2022 / TRUE COPY / /07/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

MM Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To

1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUMAYAM.

2. DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PUDUKKOTTAI.

3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, K.PUDUPATTY POLICE STATION, PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT.

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

COPY TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.1, TRICHY.

2.DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TRICHY. +1. CC to M/S.SENTHILKUMAR R Advocate SR.No.6025

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9721 of 2022 Date :23/06/2022 RK/JM/SAR-I/06.07.2022 : 6P/8C 3/3