A.Dinesh Babu v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Eighteenth day of May Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.10464 of 2022 A.DHINESH BABU [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHEYYAR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.

CR.NO.686 OF 2019.

For Petitioner : M/S.V.LOGESWAREN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.DAMODARAN, Additional Public Prosecutor, PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences publishable under Sections 147, 148 and 302 of IPC 1860, and Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act 1922 in Crime No.686 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. This is the fifth anticipatory bail application. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioner along with other accused conspired together, attacked the deceased with deadly and thereby, caused death to him. Hence, the case was registered as against the petitioner and others.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this is the 5th anticipatory bail petition and earlier applications in Crl.O.P.No.8730 of 2020 was dismissed as withdrawn on 24.06.2020, Crl.O.P.No.16009 of 2020 was dismissed on 28.10.2020, Crl.O.P.No.6266 of 2021 was dismissed on 22.04.2021 and Crl.O.P.N.11591 of 2021 was dismissed on 08.07.2021. He would further submit that the petitioner being the junior advocate of the main accused/A1, was roped into this https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

case. Only based on the confession of the co-accused, he has been implicated in this case. Co-accused in this case were arrested and later released on bail and hence, he sought for anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there is no change in circumstances in this case, after the dismissal of the earlier applications. He would further submit that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much essential in this case. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that there is no change of circumstances in this case, after dismissal of the earlier applications, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 18/05/2022 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHEYYAR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANNAMALAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S V.LOGESWAREN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.10464/2022 Date :18/05/2022 TA-25/05/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/