Kannabiran v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 23.01.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

1. Kannabiran

2. Arputhraj ... Petitioners Vs.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Kottakuppam Police Station, Viluppuram.

(Crime No.484 of 2024).

... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent police concerned in Crime No.484 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.Mohameed Aasif For Respondent : Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Page No.1 of 4

O R D E R

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.484 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 457, 380 and 506 (ii) IPC, the present petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail. 2.Pleading innocence on the part of the petitioners, false implication in the case, learned counsel for the petitioners seek indulgence of this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are an innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court.

3.The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police, opposing for grant of anticipatory bail, is that the petitioners robbed the thali chain weighing about 12 grams and silver lamp from the complainant's house and also they Page No.2 of 4

attempted to commit theft in other two houses in the same village. He further submitted that, apart from this case, the first petitioner has 10 previous cases and the second petitioner has 4 previous cases of similar in nature pending against the petitioners and therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners are very much required.

4. Considering the gravity of the offence committed by the petitioners and also the fact that the the first petitioner has 10 previous cases and the second petitioner has 4 previous cases which are similar in nature pending against them, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 23.01.2025 av Page No.3 of 4

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

av 23.01.2025 Page No.4 of 4