M.Muniasamy v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Fourth day of January Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP(MD) No.986 of 2019 S.GOPI ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED (RANK NOT KNOWN) Vs STATE BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE TOWN WEST POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MR.A.MOHAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested on 04.01.2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 147,148,341,302 and 109 of IPC @ 147, 148, 341, 302, 120(b) and 109 of IPC in Crime No.4 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail

2. The case of the prosecution is that the wife the deceased had given a complaint that at about 07.45 a.m when the deceased was about to drop her daughter in the school bus stop, the deceased was attacked by Srirangan, John vivek, Vignesh and Surya who are A1 to A4 in this case and Alex Raj, Shanmugavel, Masanam and Saravakumar have conspired and directed the A1 to A4 , who had assaulted the deceased in the broad day light and had committed murder. The deceased had sustained several several injuries in his vital parts and the reason for the murder is that the deceased is the informant in the murder of his brother, wherein some of the accused are accused in that case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that he has been falsely implicated in this case and his name does not find place in the First Information Report. He would also submit that the petitioner is an Engineering student and he is yet to complete the Course https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) would submit that the petitioners have committed the murder in a well planned manner. He would further submit that it was brutal murder committed in the day light before the public which destroyed the tranquillity among the public. He would also submit that investigation is at the preliminary stage.

5. Taking into consideration, the nature and gravity of offence the since the offence committed by the petitioner is very heinous in nature, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Hence this bail petition is dismissed sd/- 24/01/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE TOWN WEST POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL 2 THE OFFICER IN - CHARGE SUB JAIL, DINDIGUL.

3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI +1. CC to Mr.A.MOHAN Advocate SR.No.1251

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.986 of 2019 Date :24/01/2019 MSI/JC/SAR-II/04.02.2019-2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/