Madras High CourtCRL OP/2895/2021dismissed

S.Shankar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep.By

2021-02-16Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16.02.2021

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN Crl.O.P.No.2895 of 2021

1. S.Shankar

2. Jayanthi ... Petitioners -VsThe State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Inspector of Police, D3, Kanagammachatram Police Station, Tiruttani Taluk, Tiruvallur District.

... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to enlarge the petitioners herein on anticipatory bail in Cr.No.10 of 2021 pending on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Arunkumar For Respondent : Mr.S.Karthikeyan Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The case has been heard through video conference The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 143, 294(b), 324, 506(2) of IPC in Crime No.10 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, as a result of which, the petitioners and the 4 accused persons assaulted the defacto complainant with stones and abused them in filthy words and caused injuries. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, as a result of which, the petitioners and the 4 accused https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

persons assaulted the defacto complainant with stones and abused them in filthy words and sustained injuries. He would further submit that A1 and A3 have been arrested and remanded to judicial custody. He would further submit that there are seven previous cases pending as against the 1st petitioner and three previous cases pending as against the 2nd petitioner. Hence, he would vehemently oppose for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that co-accused have been arrested and remanded to judicial custody and the petitioner is a notorious rowdy and habitual offender and considering the bad antecedent of the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 16/02/2021 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.I, TIRUTTANI, TIRUVALLUR DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, D3, KANAGAMMACHATRAM POLICE STATION, TIRUTTANI TALUK, TIRUVALLUR DSITRICT.

CC to M/S. S.ARUNKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.2895/2021 Date :16/02/2021 RVR 08/03/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/