Madras High Court grants anticipatory bail to man accused of attempting to murder lawyer for failing to send legal notice on time

The Madras High Court on Tuesday granted anticipatory bail to a man accused of attempting to murder his lawyer for failing to have sent a legal notice on time (M Karthiga Priyadarshini v. State)..The accused was charged with Sections 294 (obscene acts and songs), 506(ii) (punishment for criminal intimidation), 307 (attempt to murder) and 120B (punishment of criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code..An FIR had been registered in 2019 after a practicing advocate complained that he had been called to a certain place on the evening of June 25, 2019 for a case discussion, where he had been abused in filthy language and attacked with a wooden log by two persons who came on a motorcycle. .The assailants were stated to have fled the scene of occurrence after the lawyer raised alarm. The lawyer was later admitted to a government hospital. .Five persons stood accused in the case, the prosecution told the Court. In a further statement given by the complainant-lawyer to the police, he said that the first accused was a client of his who had asked the complainant to issue a legal notice. .The complainant alleged that the first accused later approached the four others accused to murder the complainant after he failed to issue the legal notice on time. It was also alleged that the first accused had paid a sum of Rs 20,000 to the other accused to carry out the murder of the complainant-lawyer. .The FIR registered against the accused initially also cited Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 on the lawyer's complaint that his assailants were well aware that he belonged to a Scheduled Caste. The High Court, however, quashed this charge on Tuesday. As a result, the Court was not barred from considering the plea by the first accused for anticipatory bail.The Court ultimately allowed the anticipatory bail plea while also noting that the incident took place in 2019, that the others co-accused have been released on bail and since the investigation in the case is complete. .In the event of arrest, the Court has directed that the first accused/petitioner be released on bail on the execution of Rs 10,000 and two sureties of like amount. .Among other conditions, the accused-petitioner was also directed to appear before the trial court on all hearing dates, not to tamper with evidence or witnesses and not to abscond. If the accused-petitioner absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A (failure by person released on bail or bond to appear in Court) of the IPC, the Court added. .Advocate H Manivannan appeared for the petitioner. Additional Public Prosecutor S Karthikeyan appeared for the State and Advocate R Sankara Subbu appeared for the intervenor (de facto complainant)..[Read Order]