Muthuramalingam vs State

A.D.Jagadish Chandira, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.01.2023, in connection with Crime No.31 of 2023, registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C and later, altered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 201 and 302 of IPC, on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution as per the de-facto complainant/Vanitha, is that her husband/deceased, who was a practicing Advocate, was found dead in the car. On the complaint given by her, a case in Crime No.31 of 2023 was registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C. During the course of investigation, it came to light that the accused, who are the clients of the victim/deceased, on account of the previous dispute with regard to the purchase of contraband and also due to some financial dispute, had taken the victim/deceased in a car and had committed the murder by strangulating him with seat belt and escaped from the scene of occurrence. Thereby, the case has been altered to one under Sections 120(B), 201 and 302 of IPC. Hence the case.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent person and he had been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that this is a second bail application and the earlier application for bail filed in Crl.O.P.No.12837 of 2023 has been dismissed on 09.06.2023 since it was represented by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) that the petitioner is said to have been involved in 15 previous cases. He would further submit that out of 15 previous cases, the petitioner has been acquitted in 8 cases and he has been attending the trials regularly in all other remaining cases. He would also submit that originally the case has been registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C. and later, only based on the suspicion, the petitioner and the other accused had been implicated in this case. He would further submit that the committal proceedings had been over and the petitioner and other accused, who has been granted bail has been ordered to appear before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri on 30.08.2023. He would further submit that the petitioner has a permanent residence at Sivaganga and his close relatives are ready to stand as sureties to him. He would also submit that the petitioner is also ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. The petitioner has to come out and engage a counsel to conduct a case. Thereby, he seeks for grant of bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent police would submit that it is a case of murder of an Advocate. The accused, due to the previous dispute with regard to the purchase of the contraband, had committed murder of the de-facto complainant's husband by strangulating him with car's seat belt. He would further submit that the presence of the petitioner is confirmed by the CCTV footages. He would also submit that test identification parade has been conducted and the witnesses have also identified the petitioner.

In reply, Mr.A.Saran Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is no direct evidence for the commission of murder and the other accused had also been granted bail. Hence, he seeks to grant bail to the petitioner.

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

This Court had dismissed the earlier bail application since the petitioner has involved in 15 previous cases and out of 15 previous cases, the petitioner has been acquitted in eight(8) cases. Now, the case is also been committed to the Sessions Court for appearance on 30.08.2023

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also considering the period of incarceration from 26.01.2023, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) with two blood sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-No.II, Krishnagiri, 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 learned Principal Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri on all working days at 10.30am unless his presence is required for attending the cases before any other Court;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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];

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.