BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Tenth day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.NAGAMUTHU CRL OP(MD) No.14569 of 2011 RAMESH ... PETITIONER / SOLE ACCUSED Vs STATE REP BY:: THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUMAYAM POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DT CR NO. 104 OF 2011 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. S.DEENADHAYALAN Advocate For Respondent : MR. K.S. DURAIPANDIAN, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No. 104 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police. Initially, this Case was registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C., and later on, the same was altered into one under Section 302 IPC. The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 21.08.2011. He seeks bail. 2. According to the case of prosecution, the deceased is the wife of the petitioner. Suspecting her fidelity, it is alleged that the petitioner committed murder of the deceased and throw her body in the nearby forest. The dead body was found by the local Village Administrative Officer, on whose complaint, the case was registered on 08.08.2011. Later on, during the course of investigation, it is alleged that the petitioner appeared before the Village Administrative Officer and gave confession statement on 21.08.2011, thereby admitting his guilty and based on the extra judicial confession statement given by the petitioner, he was arrested and he has been in judicial custody for the past 81 days. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would deny all the above allegations. He would further submit that the investigation would have made substantial progress by this time. He https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ would further submit that the petitioner will not abscond from the process of law. 4. I have considered the above submissions. 5. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the past 81 days and that the investigation would have made substantial progress and all other attendant circumstances besides the fact that there is no likelihood of petitioner absconding and the gravity of offence attributed to the petitioner and motive etc., I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, but with stringent conditions. 6. In the result, this petition is ordered and bail is granted to the petitioner on the following conditions: i) The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a likesum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam; and ii)The petitioner shall remain at Trichy and appear before the Trichy Contonment Police Station, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. sd/- 10/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUMAYAM, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT 2 DO THRO' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PUDUKKOTTAI 3 THE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT MADURAI 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THIRUMAYAM POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DT 5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE TRICHY CONTONMENT POLICE STATION, TRICHY 6 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY 1. CC to M/S. S.DEENADHAYALAN Advocate SR.No.38865: DM::2011:NOVEMBER:11:: ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14569 of 2011 2P:8C:: Date :10/11/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/