Madras High CourtCRL OP/4178/2021dismissed

Anbazhagan@ Geetha v. State By

2021-03-08Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.03.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.4178 of 2021 1.Anbazhagan @ Geetha ... Petitioners 2.Sathish Kumar @ Sanjana Vs.

The State by, ... Respondent The Inspector of Police, J-11, Kannagi Nagar Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.969 of 2020) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to enlarge bail in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.969 of 2020 pending on the file of respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr. V. Dinesh Kumar For Respondent : Mr.C.Iyyappa Raj 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 offences publishable under Section 379 of I.P.C in Cr. No.969 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per defacto complainant is that on 07.08.2020 when he was standing near Axis Bank at OMR Road, the petitioners along with other accused persons were collecting alms from the public and that the defacto complainant had also given Rs.10/- as alms to the petitioners. At that time the first petitioner diverted the attention of the defacto complainant and snatched the money purse of the defacto complainant and ran away. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that this is the second https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

application for anticipatory bail and earlier application was dismissed by this Court vide Crl.O.P.No.15237 of 2020 dated 28.09.2020. However, the petitioners have not been arrested so far. He would submit that the petitioners are prepared to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed on them. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that this is the case where the petitioners diverted the attention of the defacto complainant and snatched the money purse from the defacto complainant and stolen Rs.5,000/-. He would further submit that there are four previous cases pending against the petitioners, out of which, one case has been registered for offence under NDPS Act. He would submit that after the dismissal of the earlier application filed by the petitioners, there is no change of circumstances.

5. This Court taking into consideration the bad antecedents of the petitioners, had dismissed the earlier application on 28.09.2020 and there is no change in circumstances after the dismissal of the earlier application, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. -sd/- 08/03/2021 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 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, J-11 KANNAGI NAGAR POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.V.DINESH KUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.4178/2021 Date :08/03/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ TA-16/03/2021