VENKATESAN Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILPAUK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein challenges the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Egmore, Chennai, in M.P.No.3025 of 2019, in which, the learned Magistrate has cancelled the order granting bail to the petitioner in Crl.M.P.No.11212 of 2019 dated 30.09.2019.

(2.) The allegation is that on 21.09.2019, at about 9.00 p.m., the victim-Venkatesan, the husband of the defacto-complainant was requested by the petitioner/accused to join him for selling fish on the following day i.e., on 22.09.2012 and when Venkatesan refused, the petitioner picked up a wordy altercation with him and assaulted Venkatesan with a log on his head. The victim was immediately taken to the nearby hospital, where, first aid was administered, and thereafter, he was referred to Government Rajiv Gandhi Medical College and Hospital. At the instance of the victim's wife, the defacto complainant, the case in Crime No.333/2019 for the offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 324, 506(ii) IPC., came to be registered on 22.09.2019, by the respondent police. Subsequently, Venkatesan succumbed to injuries on 19.10.2019, following which, the case came to be altered to one under Section 341, 294(b), 302, 506(ii) IPC.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the Court after weighing the facts of the case and has granted bail to the petitioner, and now the fact that he might have to be taken for custodial interrogation, cannot be a ground to cancel the bail. He relied on the authorities of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Santosh VS. State of Maharashtra,2019 9 SCC 714 and Devender Kumar Vs. State of Haryana, 2010 6 SCC 753.