Kalimuthu v. The Inspector Of Police

Crl.O.P.No.6493 of 2023 Crl.O.P.No.6493 of 2023 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Section 392 of IPC alter into Section 395 of IPC in Crime No.97 of 2023, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused had robbed a sum of Rs.6,700/- and snatched a cell phone from the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint.

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. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the petitioner along with other accused had robbed a sum of Rs.6,700/- and also snatched a cell phone from the defacto complainant. He would further submit that he has one previous case pending against him and the arrested accused are still in custody. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.6493 of 2023 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

Lpp

5. Taking into consideration of the bad antecedents of the petitioner and also considering the fact that the arrested accused are still in custody, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 24.03.2023 Lpp Crl.O.P.No.6493 of 2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis