S.Murugesan v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Eleventh day of February Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice R. PONGIAPPAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.3338 of 2022 S.MURUGESAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALANTHURAI POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.18/2022 For Petitioner : M/S.N.MANIKANDAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.S.SANTHOSH, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under sections 353, 448 & 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.18 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on 22.01.2022, the petitioner and other accused trespassed into the Pooluvapatti Town Panchayat Office and without getting prior permission, they fixed the framed photograph of the Hon'ble Prime Minister. Hence the present case has been registered by the Law Enforcing Agency for the above said crime.

3.The learned counsel appearing 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 co-accused in this case has already been released on bail. Hence,he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police raised an objection stating that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious one. According to him, if the anticipatory bail is granted to this type of offence, he may again commit the same type of offence.

5. The submissions made by the learned Counsels appearing for either sides are considered. The respondent police herein registered the case against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 353, 448 & 506(i) of IPC. Though the abovesaid offences are not a serious one, on going through the averments found in the First Information Report, it appears that during the relevant point of time the petitioner and others were in a drunken mode entered in the Public office, after made threatening committed this offence.

6. Accordingly, taking note of all the above said aspects into consideration, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

In view of the above, the bail petition is dismissed. -sd/- 11/02/2022 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, ALANTHURAI POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.N.MANIKANDAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.3338/2022 Date :11/02/2022 RW 21/02/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/