Veeran v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15.06.2020

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Crl.O.P.No.8410 of 2020 1.Veeran 2.Munenthira ... Petitioners /Vs/ State Represented by The Inspector of Police, E-1 Ponneri Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

(Crime No.122 of 2020) ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 439 of Cr.P.C., to enlarge the Petitioners on bail in Crime No.122 of 2020, on the file of the Inspector of Police, E-1 Ponneri Police Station, Thiruvallur District. For Petitioners : Ms.M.Sathyasai Eswari For Respondent : Mr.C.Iyyappa Raj Additional Public Prosecutor * * * * * 1/4

ORDER

This petition has been filed by the petitioner to enlarge the Petitioners on bail in Crime No.122 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent Police.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant one Balasubramaniam lodged a complaint on 19.03.2020 against the unknown persons alleging that they entered in to the house of the defacto complainant and stolen cash and jewelry from his house.

3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners were not in the place of occurrence and the petitioners already in confinement in another case. The petitioners are no way connected and falsely implicated in this case.

4. From 11.01.2020 in and around the area the petitioner involved in several roberry during one of the robbery they had taken the cell phone, the cell phone was active and through the cell phone the accused were monitored infact after the petitioners/accused movements were 2/4

monitored which corroborated with the offences thereafter the person who is having the phone was called for enquiry, who appeared before the respondent police and informed that they are no way connected with the offence. Thereafter, they were again let off. But the monitoring of the mobile phone and tower movements were kept under watch. Later the accused sensing trouble, destroyed the phone. Thereafter, the accused were arrested and during the arrest they admitted their involvement in the above offence and recoveries were made from them and hence, strongly objected for grant of bail of the petitioners. These petitioners for the past few months were very active committing the offences, if they are let out and they would abscond and shift the place of their activities and would be a menace to the society and strongly objected for grant of bail.

5. Considering the nature of offence and their involvement the petitioners are menace to the society, their activities cannot be taken lightly and this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. 3/4

M.NIRMAL KUMAR,J.

arb

6. In view of the same, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 15.06.2020 arb To

1. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Ponneri.

2. The Superintendent.

Central Prision, Puzhal, Chennai.

3. The Inspector of Police, E-1 Ponneri Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

Crl.O.P.No.8410 of 2020 4/4