Madras High CourtCRL OP/10878/2020dismissed

Sakthivel v. The State Rep.By

2020-07-22Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 22.07.2020 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.10878 of 2020 Sakthivel ... petitioner Vs.

State rep. by its The Inspector of Police Tiruchengode Town Police Station, Namakkal District.

Crime No.824 of 2020 ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.824 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For petitioner : Mr.C.S.Saravana For Respondent : Mr.M. Mohammed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under sections 447, 427, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.824 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that A1 and the defacto complainant are close relatives and there was some dispute between them in respect of property. While so, on the date of occurrence, there was a wordy quarrel between the parties. At that time, the petitioner along with other accused, abused and attacked the defacto complainant and also threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that already two FIRs are pending against the defacto complainant on the basis of the complaint given by A1 and now as a counter blast, the present complaint has been preferred by the defacto complainant and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there was a property dispute between A1 and the defacto complainant. While https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

so, the petitioner accompanied with A1, attacked the defacto complainant and also threatened him with dire consequences. He would further submit that the victim is still taking treatement as in patient in the Velavan Hospital, Tiruchenkodu. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into account of the fact that the injured is still in the hospital, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 22/07/2020 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUCHENGODE 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUCHENGODE TOWN POLICE STATION, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.C.S.SARAVANAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.10878/2020 Date :22/07/2020 RD 24/08/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/