1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT (Criminal Jurisdiction) Thursday, the Twenty Ninth day of September Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.MALA CRL OP(MD) No.13081 of 2011 VANNAMUTHU :PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO-2 -Vs- THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RAJAPALAYAM NORTH POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT. CR.NO. 122 OF 2011 :RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. R.ALAGUMANI, Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.RAMAR, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER:The Court Made the following order:- The petitioner is arrayed as A2 and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 06.08.2011 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 379 I.P.C., in Crime No.122 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that on 16.02.2011, a case has been registered in Crime No.122 of 2011 for girl missing. He further submitted that on 18.02.2011, the body of the Mahalakshmi was floated in a water pool and hence, a case has been altered into Sections 302, 201 and 379 I.P.C. He further submitted that during the investigation, A1 was arrested and on the basis of the confession given by A1, the petitioner/A2 was implicated in this case and the overt act attributed against the petitioner is that he was screening the evidence. He further submitted that A1 has already been released on bail and the investigation is considerably over and hence, he prays for enlargement on bail. 3.Refuting the same, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that initially, a case has been registered under girl missing, after the body of the deceased was found, the case has been altered into one Sections 302, 201 and 379 I.P.C. He further submitted that during the investigation, A1 was arrested and on the basis of the confession given by A1, the petitioner was implicated in this https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 case. He further submitted that A1 has compelled the deceased to Love, which was denied by her and hence, he threatened the deceased and committed an act of murder. He further submitted that A2 has taken away the jewels worn by the deceased and caused disappearance of evidence. He further submitted that the investigation is going on and hence, he prays for the dismissal of this application. 4.Considering the rival submissions made by both sides and also considering the fact that the deceased Mahalakshmi was missing on 16.02.2011 and on 18.02.2011 her body was floated in a water pool and the name of the accused has not been find place and during the investigation, A1 was arrested and on his confession only, the petitioner was implicated in this case and the jewels has been recovered from the A1 and A1 has already been enlarged on bail and the investigation is considerably over, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 5.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Rajapalayam and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the Court concerned daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. sd/- 29/09/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO: 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District. 2.-Do- Thro' The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Virudhunagar District @ Srivilliputhur. 3.The Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 4.The Inspector of Police, Rajapalayam North Police Station, Virudhunagar District. 5.The Officer In-charge, District Prison, Virudhunagar. +1. CC to M/S. R.ALAGUMANI Advocate SR.No.34152. RP/30.09.2011/2P/7C. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.13081 of 2011. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/