BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twentieth day of December Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.16391 of 2011 MONIS RAJAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED(SINGLE) Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERUMALPURAM POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. (CR.NO.590/2011) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. S.RAGAVENTHRE Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.S.DURAIPANDIAN, Addl. Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner was arrested on 06.12.2011 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 302 I.P.C in Crime No.590 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police. 2.Heard the learned Senior counsel appearing for the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3.According to the learned Senior counsel that the petitioner is an innocent person and the police have also registered a case only under Section 304(A) I.P.C. But at the same time, another police station registered a complaint under Section 302 I.P.C on the same allegations made therein. He would further submit that the petitioner is a popular tennis player and in order to damage the image of the petitioner, ordinary road accident has been converted into 302 I.P.C. He would further submit that the petitioner is a first year Medical College student and he has no animosity against the deceased girl and therefore there is no motive for the commission of alleged crime. He would further submit that the petitioner is a permanent resident in the town and he has got permanent root in the society and therefore, he would not abscond from the clutches of law and he would be available for further investigation. Therefore, he may be granted regular bail. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor in his argument would submit that bail plea of the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge. He would further submit in his argument that the two different complaints given in the two different police stations have been registered and both F.I.Rs would be clubbed together as per the orders of the Superintendent of Police and the investigation carried out by the respondent police in Cr.No.590 of 2011 would reveal that the petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ has teased the deceased girl and he was warned by the deceased not to tease her and only upon the inimical attitude, he has driven the car in rash and negligent manner and hit against the deceased girl when she was riding on her bicycle. He would further submit that investigation is offing and it is not a stage for granting bail. He would also produce the CD file for the perusal of the Court regarding the investigation of the case. 5.Considering the submissions made by both sides, I could see that the petitioner had driven the vehicle and dashed against the deceased girl, when she was riding on her bi-cycle. The investigation done by the respondent police would reveal through its CD file that the deceased girl was teased by the petitioner and for that, the said girl had warned the petitioner that she would report it at his house and for that, the petitioner had stated that he would dash his car against her and kill her and accordingly, the petitioner had dashed the car against the deceased girl when she was riding on the cycle and caused her death. Further the statements on record in the case would also support the said version. Under the said circumstances, further investigation is offing and if for any reason, the petitioner is released on bail, there is a likelihood of tampering of witnesses. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. 6.Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. sd/- 20/12/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERUMALPURAM POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. 2. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PALAYAMKOTTAI. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.16391 of 2011 Date :20/12/2011 RJ/26.12.11 2p/4c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/