Madras High CourtCRL OP/10740/2020dismissed

Senthil v. The State Rep. By

2020-07-17Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.07.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.OP.No.10740 of 2020 Senthil ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep by ... Respondent The Sub Inspector of Police, G-4, Cheyyur Police Station, Chengalpet District.

Crime No.1005 of 2020.

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.1005 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Anbazhagan For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(This case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences publishable under Sections 294 (b), 324 and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.1005 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to a wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the defacto complainant, the petitioner assaulted the defacto complainant with wooden log and threatened with dire consequences, thereby, the defacto complainant sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are relatives and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are relatives and they had a wordy quarrel during which, the petitioner assaulted the defacto complainant with wooden log resulting in the the defacto complainant sustaining injuries. He would further submit that though the injured has been discharged from the hospital, there are four previous cases pending against the petitioners out of which, one under Section 302 IPC. Therefore, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into account the fact that the petitioner has four previous cases to his credit out of which, one under Section 302 IPC. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 17/07/2020 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 SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, G-4, CHEYYUR POLICE STATION, CHENGALPET DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S. P.ANBAZHAGAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.10740/2020 Date :17/07/2020 TA-25/08/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/