Prabakaran v. The State Rep By Its, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Prabakaran ... Petitioner(s) /Accused Vs.

State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Karuppur Police Station, Salem District.

... Respondent(s)/ Complainant (Crime No.891 of 2024) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest a case in Crime No.891 of 2024 on the file of the respondent. For petitioner(s) : Mr.C.Deepak Kumar For Respondent(s) : Mr.S.Santhosh, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Page No.1 of 6

O R D E R

This is the second anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner before this Court.

2. Though the earlier anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner was dismissed by my learned predecessor, Hon'ble Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira, this petition is listed before this Court pursuant to the orders passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Crl.O.P.No.31787 of 2024 on 04.03.2025.

3. The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.891 of 2024, seeks anticipatory bail.

4. The case of the prosecution is that on account of prior enmity, the petitioner attacked the defacto complainant with knife, while the other accused assaulted him with their hands and abused him in filthy language. Page No.2 of 6

5. The first anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner herein in Crl.OP.No.82 of 2025, dated 24.01.2025, was dismissed, insofar as the first petitioner/ petitioner herein is concerned, by my learned predecessor, Hon'ble Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira, with the following observations:- "6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners; this court is of the view that the first petitioner attacked the defacto complainant with a knife. Therefore, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed as against the first petitioner."

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the coaccused has been granted anticipatory bail and, considering the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, the petitioner may also be granted anticipatory bail.

Page No.3 of 6

7. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the first anticipatory bail application was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner had attacked the defacto complainant with a knife and that there are two previous cases against the petitioner.

8. This Court finds no change in circumstances and is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed.

17.03.2025 Index : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order Internet: Yes/No skr Page No.4 of 6

To

1. The Inspector of Police, Karuppur Police Station, Salem District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.

Page No.5 of 6

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

skr 17.03.2025 Page No.6 of 6