Balakrishnan v. State Rep By The Sub Inspector Of Police

CRL OP NO. 3091 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07-02-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 3091 of 2025 BALAKRISHNAN No 32 Tambi Durai Street Attayampatti Salem District Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep By The Sub Inspector Of Police Attaiyampatti Police Station, Salem District, Crime No.268 Of Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):

Sasikumar R A.Tamilselvan B.Sasikala A.J.Magendiraverman Y.Akash Mathew For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Santhosh, Government Advocate (crl Side)

ORDER

The petitioner/A1, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 118(1), 296(b) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.268 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant viz., Aravindan, is that on 28.10.2024, at about 10.00 p.m., when he and his brother were travelling on his motor

cycle near Attaiyampatti Circle, a wordy quarrel arose between the accused and the defacto complainant, due to which, the petitioner along with other accused had attacked the defacto complainant and his brother with wooden log. Thereby, the defacto complainant has sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any other stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent Police, while opposing for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, would submit that there was a wordy quarrel arose between the accused and the defacto complainant, due to which, the petitioner along with other accused had attacked the defacto complainant and his brother with wooden log. He would further submit that the petitioner has nine previous cases, out of which, four cases are disposed of.

5. Taking into consideration of the facts and submissions made by the learned Government Advocate and also considering the fact that the earlier petition was dismissed since the petitioner has nine previous cases and now having found that is

wasting the Court's time, the petitioner is directed to pay the cost of Rs.5,000/- to the Chief Justice Relief Fund within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner .

6. This Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed accordingly. 07-02-2025 msv To The Sub Inspector Of Police Attaiyampatti Police Station, Salem District,