Elangovan v. Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Crl.O.P.No.10357 of 2021 Elangovan ... Petitioner Vs.
State rep by The Sub Inspector of Police, B-7, Vellavedu Police Station, Thiruvallur District.
(Crime No.165 of 2021)
...Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of apprehending arrest in Crime No.165 of 2021 pending on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Manivelan For Respondent : Mr.C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
(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 147, 148, 294(b), 427 & 307 of IPC read with Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908, in Crime No.165 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.There are totally eleven accused and the petitioner is arrayed as A11. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioner along with other accused persons damaged the briyani shop by throwing petrol bomb and also attacked with knife and iron rod and stolen the two wheeler of the defacto complainant. Hence, the law enforcing agency registered a case against the petitioner and other accused persons.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the A2, A3 and A5 were arrested and released on bail by the learned Principal District and Sessions Court, Thiruvalluru, in Crl.M.P.No.2254 of 2021 dated 12.05.2021. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that due to previous enmity, the petitioner along with other accused persons damaged the briyani shop by throwing petrol bomb and also attacked with knife and iron rod and stolen the two wheeler of the defacto complainant. He would submit that A1 and A11 are still in custody. He would further submit that there are two previous cases pending against the petitioner. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent.
6.Taking into consideration the facts and submissions of the learned Counsel and also the fact that there are two previous cases pending as against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 29/06/2021 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.1, POONAMALLEE 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE THIRUVALLUR [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, B-7, VELLAVEDU POLICE STATION, THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT.
4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S M.MANIVELAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.10357/2021 Date :29/06/2021 APN 27/07/2021