BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Seventeenth day of February Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice C.T.SELVAM CRL OP(MD) No.1996 of 2011 1 VINOTH PANDIYAN 2 THAVAMANI @ THAVAM 3 RAMESH BABU 4 VENKATESAN 5 JAGADEESH PANDIAN 6 MANIKANDAN ..PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Vs. THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DINDIGUL TALUK POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL. CR.NO. 1099 OF 2010 ..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioners : MR.N.R.ELANGO Senior Counsel for MR.R.VIVEKANANDAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.P.RAJENDRAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners are arrayed as accused and the petitioners were remanded to judicial custody on 16.12.2010 and 20.12.2010 respectively for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 341 and 302 IPC, in Crime No.1099 of 2010, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek bail. 2. Heard Mr.N.R.Elango, learned Senior Counsel for Mr.R.Vivekanandan learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.P.Rajendran, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the state. 3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners states that the first petitioner had an illicit relationship with a girl. On the same being objected to by the wife of the first petitioner and as a result of the panchayat held in respect of thereto, the first petitioner was required to sever his relationship with the girl. The parents of the first petitioner were both done to death by the family members of the girl. They were arrested and released on bail and while proceeding to Court to comply with the condition on bail, they https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ were set upon by the accused herein and two persons were done to death. The first petitioner and the petitioners 4 and 6 were named in the FIR while the other two petitioners were not. He would submit that they have surrendered on 16.12.2010 and 201.12.2010, custodial interrogation stands completed and the investigation is almost over. 4. Learned Government Advocate would oppose grant of bail informing that thus far two persons on either side have been done to death and there is a possibility of flare-up if these petitioners are released on bail. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, that these petitioners have no prior cases and also that custodial interrogation stands completed, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on executing a separate 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 No.I, Dindigul, and on further condition that the petitioners shall stay at Chennai and report before the Flower Bazaar Police Station, Chennai every day by morning at 10.00 a.m., until further orders. Considering the sensitivities involved, this Court would go slow in relaxing the condition imposed. Sd/- 17/02/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.1, DINDIGUL. 2 -Do-Thro' THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DINDIGUL. 3 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DINDIGUL TALUK POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL. 6 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FLOWER BAZAAR POLICE STATION, CHENNAI. +1. CC to M/S. R.VIVEKANANDAN Advocate SR.No.8966 akm/18.02.11 /2p-7c/ ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.1996 of 2011 Date :17/02/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/