1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Sixteenth day of August Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms. Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.10577 of 2011 RAJA @ RAJARAMAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED (RANK NOT KNOWN) Vs THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE EAST POLICE STATION,THANJAVUR, CRIME NO.504 OF 2010 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. M.PALANISAMY Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.RAMAR, Additional Public Prosecutor ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner/accused filed this petition seeking anticipatory bail for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147 and 302 IPC, in Crime No. 504 of 2010 on the file of the respondent police. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that on the basis of a complaint given by one Nachiammal, a case has been registered stating that her son Sami @ Selvaraj was missing on 09.08.2010. On 15.08.2010, one Saravanan said to have given extra judicial confession before the V.A.O by implicating the petitioner in the case and now the investigation is over. He further submits that the body of the said Sami @ Selvaraj was not recovered. Even though, the case has been registered on 15.08.2010, for the past one year the petitioner was neither arrested not absconded. Hence, he seeks for enlargement on anticipatory bail. 3. The learned Additional Government Advocate (Criminal side) submits that a case has been registered on 09.08.2010 and subsequently, a confession statement was given by Saravanan before the VAO. On that basis the petitioner was implicated. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and totally there are seven accused. Three accused died and the other three accused were arrested. The petitioner is yet to be arrested and the investigation is going on. He further submits that the petitioner is needed for interrogation. Hence he prays for dismissal of petition. 4. Considering the submissions on both sides, it could be seen that the mother of the deceased Sami @ Selvaraj namely Nachiammal gave a complaint stating that her son was missing for the past seven years. A2 Saravanan gave a extra judicial confession statement before the VAO and on that basis only the petitioner and others were implicated and the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 petitioner was shown as A1. Since the petitioner was not arrested and since the case has been filed based on circumstantial evidence, the police need the petitioner / A1 for interrogation. More over, the case is filed under Sections 147 and 302 IPC. In such circumstances, I do not find any merits. Hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. sd/- 16/08/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE EAST POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR. 2. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10577 of 2011 Date :16/08/2011 RJ/19.8.11 2p/3c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/