The main legal point established in the judgment is the relevance of incriminating evidence, such as cell phone conversations and meetings, in determining the eligibility for anticipatory bail in a murder conspiracy case.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Crl.O.P.No.11628 of 2023 is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. praying to grant bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest in Crime No.156 of 2023 on the file of respondent police.

Crl.O.P.No.11758 of 2023: is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.156 of 2023 for offence under Sections 147, 120(B) and 302 IPC, on the file of respondent police.)

1. These Criminal Original Petitions are filed praying to grant bail to the petitioner in these Criminal Original Petitions, in the event of their arrest in Crime No.156 of 2023 on the file of respondent police.

2. Mr.John Sathiyan, learned senior counsel appearing for Mr.M.Suresh kumar, petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.11628 of 2023 submitted that petitioner is first accused in this case. He is falsely implicated in this case on the basis of the complaint given by the deceased''s wife Tmt. Priyanka. Priyanka is a woman of immoral character. She had illicit affair with another person. Deceased is a close relative of first accused. False Allegation was made by the defacto complainant that first accused tried to misbehave with her. This allegation was made only with a view to extract money from first accused. The deceased had criminal cases pending against him and he had many enemies. In support of his submission, he produced the photograph of the defacto complainant with another person and photograph of the deceased Ranjith Kumar''s sister with another person and the copy of WhatsApp communication by the defacto complainant. There is delay of 16½ hours in giving the complaint. There is no material to show that the petitioner gave money to other accused for murdering the deceased. Petitioner had no connection with the accused, who had actually murdered the deceased. By unnecessarily implicating the deceased as an accused in this case, respondent police is harassing the petitioner. Therefore, this petition is filed for seeking anticipatory bail.

3. Mr.M.Udaiya Bhanu, learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.11758 of 2023 submitted that the petitioner/A2 Thiyagarajan is an advocate practising in Salem. He is unnecessarily and falsely implicated in this case. As an advocate, he conducted civil case on behalf of first accused. Therefore he had occasions to meet first accused in connection with pending case. That cannot be a ground for implicating him as an accused. In fact, he helped in surrendering some of the accused in this case. Only to harass the petitioner, he is implicated as an accused. Thus, he seeks for anticipatory bail. In support of his submission, he pressed into service the judgment reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694 (Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and others) for the proposition that if the accused joined investigation, cooperating with the investigation and not likely to abscond, custodial interrogation should be avoided and anticipatory bail should be granted.

4. In reply, learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) submitted that the deceased was murdered after a conspiracy cast among the accused. First accused had multiple illicit intimacies. He tried to misbehave with the wife of deceased Ranjith Kumar, namely defacto complainant Priyanka. Deceased was a close relative of first accused and working for him. On knowing from the defacto complainant that first accused tried to misbehave with her, deceased got annoyed with, angered against first accused and had a plan to teach him a lesson. Sensing this and to preempt any action from the deceased, first accused conspired with second accused and other accused and committed murder of the deceased. To murder the deceased, first accused, second accused and third accused met and devised a plan. First accused paid money to third accused. The assailants were also paid money by second accused and sixth accused, after the murder. There is evidence available in the form of cell phone conversations. Evidence is also available fo