S.Paneerselvam v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 01/08/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN S.Panneerselvam ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Pattukkottai Taluk Police Station, Thanjavur District.
Crime No.303 of 2023.
... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner :
M/s.P.Krishnaveni, Advocate For Respondent :
Mr.B.Nambiselvan, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C.
PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.303 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Sole Accused herein, who was arrested on 09.07.2023 for the alleged offence under Sections 354(A), 354(B), 354(D) and Section 506(i) of IPC read with Section 4 of TNPWH Act, in Crime No.303 of 2023, on the file of the respondent 1/4
police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that, the petitioner is facing charges under Sections Sections 354(A), 354(B), 354(D) and Section 506(i) of IPC read with Section 4 of TNPWH Act. The defacto complainant lodged a complaint stating that she was working as an employee under this petitioner for about one year and frequently this petitioner used to misbehave with her. On one occasion unable to bear the continuous trouble, she made a complaint upon which a case has been registered. The petitioner was arrested and remanded to custody on 09.07.2023, ever since he is in custody. Seeking bail, this petition came to be filed.
3. Heard both sides.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the defacto complainant was an employee under the petitioner and on one occasion, a mistake was committed by her. She was scolded and warned by this petitioner. For that only, the false complaint has been made against the petitioner.
5. Apart from that it is also submitted that the petitioner is aged about 61 years and suffering from various ailments, for which he also produced medical records.
6. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that, taking advantage of the position of the defacto complainant, this petitioner misbehaved several times. According to him, it is not a fit case to exercise the 2/4
jurisdiction of this Court.
7. Considering the serious allegations that has been made against the petitioner, eventhough he is aged about 61 years, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The CD file also perused, wherein specific allegation has been made with regard to the above said misbehaviour. Since investigation is not completed and if the petitioner is released on bail, he may tamper the evidence and disturb the investigation process.
8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. sd/- 01/08/2023 / TRUE COPY / /08/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
pnn To 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PATTUKOTTAI TALUK POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DISTRICT.
2 THE OFFICER INCHARGE SUB JAIL, PATTUKKOTTAI.
3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
3/4
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.13979 of 2023 Date :01/08/2023 RS/MMS/SAR-(09.08.2023) 4P 4C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4