Thamaraikannan @ Pulikutti v. State Rep.By

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 394, 397 and 506(2) of IPC, in Crime No.33 of 2023, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners have abused the defacto complainant and threatened him with knife and also snatched a sum of Rs.2,000/-. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent would submit that the petitioners have abused the defacto complainant with filthy language and threatened him with knife and also snatched a sum of Rs.2,000/-. He would further submit that the petitioners have earlier filed an application in Crl.O.P.No.5853 of 2023

dated 15.03.2023, this Court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners and they have withdrawn the petition and now suppressing the earlier dismissal, the petitioners had filed this present petition. He would further submit that two previous cases of similar nature are pending as against the petitioners. However, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Taking into consideration, the nature of offence and the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 28.03.2023 jas

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

jas 28.03.2023