MURUGAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 3/10/2022, for the offences punishable under Ss. 323, 406, 506(i) IPC and Sec. 4 of TNPHW Act in Crime No.7 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

(2.) The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant Udayasankari is that she married one Murugan/the petitioner herein and thereafter, due to a misunderstanding, she was leaving separately along with her child for the past nine months. While so, the defacto complainant's husband Murugan along with his friends Senthil, Vasu and other henchmen, broke open the house of the defacto complainant and committed theft of several items from her house and that the petitioner also criminally intimidated her. Hence the complaint.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and this complaint has been given on account of matrimonial dispute. He would submit that the defacto complainant has stated that the petitioner had taken certain items from her house and she has also given a list of articles to the petitioner and that the petitioner is ready and willing to hand over all the articles back to the defacto complainant and he is also ready for any kind of compromise with her. He would further submit that if the petitioner is granted interim bail, he would come out on bail and immediately handover all the articles to the defacto complainant. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.