Madras High CourtCRL OP/9238/2021dismissed

C.K.Raju v. State Rep By

2021-05-13Honourable Mrs Justice S.Kannammal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Thirteenth day of May Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice S. KANNAMMAL CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.9238 of 2021 C.K.RAJU [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, GUINDY, ADYAR, CHENNAI DISTRICT.

CRIME NO. 235 / 2021.

For Petitioner : M/S.R.PARTHIBAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.T.SHUNMUGARAJESWARAN, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- (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 294(b), 380, 465, 457 and 506(ii) IPC IPC in Crime No.235 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the sister of the petitioner and that they were living in a house in separate portions. While the defacto complainant was not at home, the petitioner along with other accused had taken her things from her portion and shifted the same to some other place without her knowledge. When the same was questioned, they threatened her with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case due to property dispute. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

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

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are brother and sister and they were living in a house in separate portions. While so, due to property dispute, the petitioner along with other accused had taken her things from her portion and shifted the same to some other place without her knowledge and when it was questioned, they have threatened her with dire consequences. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail.

5. Taking into consideration the nature of offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. -sd/- 13/05/2021 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, GUINDY, ADYAR, CHENNAI DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.R.PARTHIBAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.9238/2021 Date :13/05/2021 TA-30/06/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/