KRISHNA REDDY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR. A. Ragunathan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, who is the father of the deceased in this case, submitted that the petitioner has come forward with this petition for cancellation of bail granted to the second respondent/first accused herein, who has been arrayed as A-1, out of the three accused in this case, by the Principal sessions Judge, Pondicherry.

(2.) THE learned Senior counsel before proceeding to make his submissions, challenging the order of bail, brought to the notice of this Court in respect of the facts of the case, pointed out that this is a case of husband killing his wife and further the case is based on circumstantial evidence and there are clinching circumstances, as per the materials collected by the Investigating agencies. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that there are seven circumstances implicating the first accused/ the second respondent herein, viz.

(3.) BY placing reliance on the above said circumstances, the learned Senior counsel submitted that this is a case involving a very heinous crime of the first accused causing murder of his wife in a brutal manner. Learned Senior counsel thereafter advanced his submissions challenging the order of bail granted by the learned principal Sessions judge, Pondicherry on the only ground that the order is perverse and the learned Judge has overlooked the seriousness and gravity of the offence and granted bail to the petitioner merely on the ground that the petitioner underwent incarceration for a period of more than two months ignored the other aspects.