Selvaraju v. The State Rep By Its,

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(1) of IPC in Crime No.28 of 2023, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity with regard to land dispute, the petitioner abused the defacto complainant in an unparliamentary words and threatened her with dire consequence and assaulted her with wooden log. Hence the case. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the defacto complainant is the sister in law of the petitioner. There is a family dispute with regard to property between the petitioner and defacto complainant. He further submitted that the petitioner also got injured from the conflict and admitted in the hospital. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the Intervenor raised objection and stating that the petitioner caused interference in the enjoyment of the property of two Acres which was allotted to the defacto complainant family. The husband of the defacto complainant was met with an accident, due to which, he was bed ridden. He further submitted that two acres of land was given to them for hospital expenses. After settling of two acres of land in favour of the defacto complainant, the petitioner waylaid the defacto complainant's land and caused interference to the enjoyment of the property and also attempted to harass the defacto complainant who is wife of the petitioner's own brother. He further submitted that the petitioner's intention was to grab all the properties which belongs to the defacto complainant. Hence, he prayed to dismiss this petition.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the petitioner abused the de-facto complainant and waylaid the defacto complainant's land. When the de-facto complainant questioned about the same, the petitioner assaulted the de-facto complainant with wooden log. Due to which, the defacto complainant sustained grievous injuries. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the Intervenor and learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent.

7.On seeing the conduct of petitioner, it reveals that he behaved in an unlawful manner and unnecessarily caused interference in the enjoyment of the two acres of land which belongs to the defacto complainant's family. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

28.02.2023 dk

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

dk 28.02.2023