Sugiviji @ Sughear Kumar v. State By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Third day of June Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.13141 of 2022 SUGIVIJI @ SUGHEAR KUMAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, E-1 SINGANALLUR POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE.

(CRIME NO.473/2020) For Petitioner : M/S.T.SHANMUGABOOPATHI Advocate For Respondent : MR.V.MEGANATHAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 323, 506(ii) and 420 of I.P.C. and 75(1)(c) of TN City Police Act, 1888 in Cr.No.473 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner approached the defacto complainant and borrowed a sum of Rs.25 Lakhs and when the said amount was demanded by the defacto complainant, the petitioner is alleged to have abused the defacto complainant. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and further submitted that the petitioner's father borrowed the amount from the defacto complainant and the defacto complainant demanded the petitioner to repay the amount and prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs.25 Lakhs from the defacto complainant and failed to repay the amount and further submitted that earlier, the petitioner approached this Court by filing Crl.O.P.No.2785 of 2021 and this Court has dismissed the said petition and that the petitioner has committed a heinous offence and vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.Considering the offence committed by the petitioner and the nature of the offence is heinous and since there is no change in circumstances subsequent to the order passed in Crl.O.P.No.2785 of 2021, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.This criminal original petition is accordingly dismissed. -sd/- 23/06/2022 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE E-1 SINGANALLUR POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.T.SHANMUGABOOPATHI Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.13141/2022 Date :23/06/2022 CSK 28/06/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/