Srikanth v. State Rep.By

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

The petitioners/accused seek anticipatory bail in Crime No.43 of 2024 registered by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 353, 332, 294(b) and 506(ii) of IPC r/w Section 3(1) of Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 .

2. It is stated that originally FIR in Cr.No.42 of 2024 had been registered on a complaint given by these petitioners about an objectionable post put up in the social media attacking the status of the community to which these petitioners belong. Subsequently, these petitioners had taken law in their own hands and committed rioting in which the present FIR in Cr.No.43 of 2024 had been registered. During the course of that rioting, they had damaged one ATM Machine and assaulted one Police Officer. For good measure, the other party had also indulged in rioting, for which FIR in Cr.No.44 of 2024 had been registered.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that these petitioners 1/3

are innocent and that bail had been granted for those who had been arrested. But, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) stated that his instructions are that bail had not yet been granted.

4. It is however been specifically stated that the area is still tense and at any time, the issue may flair up.

5. In view of that particular fact, at this stage, I am not inclined to grant any orders particularly orders granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition seeking anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

Vv 21.02.2024 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

2/3

Vv 21.02.2024 3/3