M.Ram Kumar v. The State Rep By Its,

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.11.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 336, 427, 392, 397 and 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.547 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on 25.11.2022 at about 03.30 p.m., the petitioner along with other accused went to the defacto complainant's tea shop and drank tea and had cigarette. While he asked money, they revealed their identity as M.G.R. Nagar Ram Kumar and Vinoth and claimed to have many cases in many police stations and often visit jail and they have also criminally intimidated him to death by stating that they have robbed a person near pillayar koil street just before the incident and if he claims money for tea, they would broke the biscuit bottles and also robbed a sum of Rs.3500/-. Hence the case.

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is the second petition for bail and the earlier petition was dismissed by this Court on the ground that there are 23 previous cases pending against him. He further submitted that A1 was arrested a day before the occurrence and the alleged offence was fabricated so as to rope this petitioner in another case. Having knew about the same, he himself surrendered before the respondent Police station voluntarily. Hence, the entire allegation is false, vindictive, wanton and he is no way connected with the alleged offence. He also submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 25.11.2022 and hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner. 4.Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent submitted that the petitioner is an habitual offender against whom there are 23 previous cases pending including four murder cases. He further submitted that if the petitioner is released on bail, he would tamper the witness and hamper the investigation. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by both counsel and also considering the gravity of the offence committed by the petitioner and the previous bad antecedent of the petitioner and there is no change in circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 21.02.2023 vkr

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

vkr 21.02.2023