Sarath @ Sarath Kumar v. State Rep By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Sixth day of June Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.10829 of 2022 SARATH @ SARATH KUMAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY, [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T-4, MADURAVOYAL POLICE STATION, CHENNAI DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.125 OF 2021.

For Petitioner : M/S.A.VIJAYASANKAR Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.DAMODARAN, Additional Public Prosecutor, PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 294(b), 392, 397, 336, 427, 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.125 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused threated the defacto complainant by showing knife and snatched a sum of Rs.8,000/- from him. It is also alleged that when the general public came forward the petitioner and other threw the bottles from the tea shop and escaped from the spot. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and no way connected with the alleged offence. He would further submit that on the confession statement given by the co-accused, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner and others robbed a sum of Rs.8,000/- from the defacto complainant and threated the general public. He further submitted that the investigation is not yet completed and if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, there is a possibility that he will tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration the nature allegations and also considering the fact that the case is in the initial stage of the investigation and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is essential, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 06/06/2022 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, T-4, MADURAVOYAL POLICE STATION, CHENNAI DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.A.VIJAYASANKAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.10829/2022 Date :06/06/2022 TA-13/06/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/