Meena v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 01/09/2022 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN CRL OP(MD). No.15765 of 2022 Meena ... Petitioner/5th Accused Vs State rep.by The Inspector of Police, Rayappanpatti Police Station, Theni District.

(Crime No.143/2022).

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.Mayilvahana Rajendran C, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B. Thanga Aravindh, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.143 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 147, 120(b), 109 and 302 IPC in Crime No. 143 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant lodged a complaint stating that on 14.06.2022, his deceased brother went outside in a two wheeler, later did not return to home. On 15.06.2022 at about 6.30 a.m., when he was standing near the shop, he was told that his brother was lying with injuries near Murugesan land. He went to the spot immediately and found that he suffered grievous injuries and died. Hence, this complaint. The https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

petitioner herein is the wife of the deceased and she said to have maintained illegal intimacy with the 1st accused and because of the above said issue by criminal conspiracy at her instance, the crime has been committed by the co-accused.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that based on the confession of co-accused only the petitioner herein is arrayed as an accused. He would further submit that there is no materials to show that she is having illegal intimacy with A1.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent would submit that the petitioner had illegal intimacy with A1 and that by that act, the offence has been committed. He would further submit that it is a case of murder and hence, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary.

5. Considering the serious nature of the offence and that no other ground except that the name petitioner has been roped with the accused persons and committed the crime, no other ground worth considering is made out. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. Hence, this Court has not find any merit in this petition .

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

Sd/- 01/09/2022 / TRUE COPY / /09/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.I) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TRP TO

1. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RAYAPPANPATTI POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.15765 of 2022 Date :01/09/2022 SP/SVR/SAR I/19/09/2022/2P/3C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis