Kamalraj vs State

T.V.Thamilselvi, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 28.12.2022 for the alleged offence under Man Missing and subsequently it was altered into Sec.147, 148, 120(B), 201, 302, 450 of I.P.C. in Crime No.511 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that on 16.10.2022 at about 10.00 hrs., deceased informed his mother that he is going to Krishnagiri to meet his friend and thereafter, he did not turn up, even after lapse of a month, his whereabouts not known and no communication from him. Hence, on suspicious, she preferred a complaint before the respondent police and on receipt of the same, the respondent police registered a case under Man Missing.

Subsequently, during investigation,this petitioner and A3, who is son of A1 and the deceased were arrested on suspicious and they were interrogated and reveals that this petitioner having illicit intimacy with A1 and the same was objected by deceased, thereby there was frequent quarrel arose with her. Hence, on the instigation of A1, this petitioner and her son A3 along with other accused were joined together and committed murder of deceased by screening the body. Accordingly, the complaint was registered against the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to some misunderstanding between A1 and deceased, they were separated for the past 15 years and thereafter, he has also got second marriage and living separately and there was no communication between them. Now, all of a sudden, the respondent police foisted a false allegation against this petitioner had illicit intimacy with A1, but there was no such relationshipo between him and A1. He would also submit that he is an innocent person and he has not at all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police and he is no way connected with the said occurrence. He would submit that there is no role of the petitioner in the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated as accused in this case. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 63 days from 28.12.2022. He would submit that co-accused was already released on bail. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that totally, there are 10 accused involved in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as A2. He would submit that all the accused were arrested. He would further submit that as A1 is having illicit intimacy with A2, she conspired together with other accused and on the date of alleged occurrence, she attacked the deceased, thereby he succumbed to injuries. He would submit that co-accused was already released on bail. He would also submit that if he is released on bail, he would tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstances and also the fact that the investigation is almost completed, and co-accused was already released on bail and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing separate bonds for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each, in which one surety must be a blood surety, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Uthangarai and on further conditions that::

(a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily twice in the morning at 10.30 a.m. and evening at 05.30 p.m. for the period of two months.

(c) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(d) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(e) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and;

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.