M SAHUL HAMEED Vs. JAMAL ALIAS JAMALUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. C. Doraipandian, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the de facto complainant and witness (PW1) in this case and he has come forward with this Petition seeking for the relief of cancelling the bail granted to the respondents 1 and 2 for the alleged offence under Section 302 of IPC.

(2.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner was vented by the accused persons from giving evidence before the Trial Court and as a result, he has given a Complaint before R1, Mambalam Police Station and a case was registered. It is submitted that so far 14 witnesses have been examined and six witnesses have been dispensed with by the prosecution and some more witnesses are yet to be examined by the prosecution. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the threat given by the respondents 1 and 2, who have been arrayed as A1 and A2, the petitioner apprehends that the witnesses may not be in a position to come and give deposition freely without any fear. Therefore, it is contended that in view of such conduct of the respondents 1 and 2, the bail granted to them is liable to be cancelled.

(3.) Mr. N. Doraisamy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, on the other hand, contended that admittedly 14 witnesses have already been examined including the petitioner herein as PW1. It is further contended that six witnesses were also dispensed with and as such there is no question of apprehension of free trial. It is contended that the respondents 1 and 2 have been falsely implicated in the complaint preferred by the petitioner herein.