Ranjith Kumar v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 21.07.2020 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.10794 of 2020 Ranjith Kumar ... petitioner Vs.

State rep. by its The Inspector of Police Thiruvalam L& O Police Station, Vellore District.

Crime No.262 of 2016 ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner/accused on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in connection with the Crime No.262 of 2016, pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For petitioner : Mr.Ilayaraja Kandasamy 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 offences punishable under sections 342 and 364(A) IPC in Crime No.262 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The Case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant one Parameshwari is that on 10.08.2016, her husband was kidnapped by some unknown persons and they demanded a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- following which, on 11.08.2016 she gave a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- to the unknown persons. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that co-accused have been arrested and released on bail by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Katpadi. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner along with other accused kidnapped the husband of the defacto complainant for ransom and also taken an amount of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Rs.4,00,000/- from the defacto complainant. He would further submit that there are five previous cases pending against the petitioner. Hence, he strongly opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the nature of offence and the antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 21/07/2020 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, KATPADI 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVALAM L & O POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT, CC to M/S. ILAYARAJA KANDASAMY Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.10794/2020 Date :21/07/2020 RD 24/08/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/