1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the First day of August Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.8447 of 2011 SEKAR ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.3 Vs STATE : REP. BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALLIKUDI POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT. CR.NO.95/2011. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. P.SENGUTTUARASAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.RAMAR, Additional Public Prosecutor ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused No.3 was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 8.6.2011 and for the alleged offences punishable under Section 302 of IPC in Crime No.95 of 2011 on the file of the respondent Police and hence, seeks bail. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the alleged occurrence took place on 20.5.2011 and the petitioner who is arrayed as A3 surrendered before the Court on 8.6.2011 and there is no overt act against the petitioner and a case has been registered against 4 persons and A1 and deceased were doing real estate business and because of the misunderstanding, the occurrence has been taken place and the petitioner is nothing to do with the commission of offence and hence, he prays for enlargement on bail. 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side) submitted that a case has been registered against four persons and except A1, A2 to A4 were surrendered and remanded to judicial custody and A1 is absconding and the deceased has made an arrangement for disposal of the property to one Palani and therefore, difference of opinion has been taken place and he prays for dismissal of this application. 4. Considering the rival submissions made by both sides this Court could find that the alleged occurrence took place on 20.5.2011 and complaint has been given on 21.5.2011 at 7.45 am even though the name of the accused has not been mentioned in FIR during the investigation four persons have been located and A1 the main accused has been absconded and A2 to A4 were surrendered before the Court and remanded to judicial custody. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he will tamper the evidence and abscond from the jurisdiction. Hence, I do not find any https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 merits in the application and the petition deserves to be dismissed and the same is dismissed. sd/- 01/08/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALLIKUDI POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI. 3. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.8447 of 2011 Date :01/08/2011 RJ/4.8.11 2p/4c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/