Rahul Seenivasan @ Rahul v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Fifth day of October Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice N.ANAND VENKATESH CRL OP(MD) No.17408 of 2018 RAHUL SEENIVASAN @ RAHUL ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.5 Vs STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MELUR POLICE STATION.

(CRIME.NO.464 OF 2018) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : Mr.A.JOSEPH JERRY Advocate For Respondent : Mr.V.NEELAKANDAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner is in judicial custody since 26.08.2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 365 and 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.464 of 2018 on the file of the respondent police. He seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the victim was kidnapped for ransom and totally 7 accused persons are involved in the crime. The accused persons had demanded Rs.2 crores for the purpose of releasing the victim. However, the victim was dropped in a particular place and all the accused persons thereafter left. The respondent police have registered the case.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that already accused Nos.4,5 and 6 have been granted bail by the Court below. That apart, the learned counsel would submit that this petitioner has been falsely added as an accused and he has been inside the jail for more than 40 days.

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that this is the case of kidnapping for a ransom. Accused Nos.1 and 3 are absconding in this case and all other accused persons were arrested and Accused Nos.4,5 and 6 have already been granted bail by the Court below. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner was the driver of the car. The learned https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Additional Public Prosecutor would further submit that the investigation is still pending since Accused Nos.1 and 3 are yet to be secured.

5.In this case, admittedly, the person who was kidnapped has already been secured by the respondent police. That apart Accused Nos.4,5 and 6 have already been granted bail by the Court below. The petitioner who was arrested on 26.08.2018 has already undergo confinement for more than 40 days. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner can be granted bail by imposing stringent conditions.

(i)the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Melur, Madurai District.

(ii)the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

sd/- 05/10/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MELUR, MADURAI DISTRICT.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MADURAI.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MELUR POLICE STATION.

4 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON,MADURAI.

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

+1. CC to M/S.A.JOSEPH JERRY Advocate SR.No.18999 PS/PN/SAR-4:05/10/2018:2P/7C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.17408 of 2018 Date :05/10/2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/